If you can not test something - it's broken.
Posted Nov 5, 2011 1:06 UTC (Sat) by khim
In reply to: libabc: a demonstration library for kernel developers
Parent article: libabc: a demonstration library for kernel developers
Basically, autotools puts the burden of ensuring portability on you, the programmer.
Sure, but this is always the case.
CMake gets around this problem by defining its own language, which works the same on all platforms.
Does it come with it's own portable POSIX implementation, too? Practically speaking when I've faced portability problems in the past differences between Solaris or HPUX shell were the simplest problems to solve. Bugs in standard library were much harder to code around.
This removes a great burden from the programmer and enables the creation of actually (as opposed to theoretically) portable code.
It solves about 5% of problem and creates it's own problems instead: where in autoconf I can just write shell code which can do practically anything in CMake I'm in straightjacket which makes it harder to make mistakes but also makes sure they are harder to fix as well.
Sorry, but from my experience CMake only makes sense for projects which decided for one reason or another to support Windows. And we are talking about low-level linux libraries here.
to post comments)