[CMake] CMake with Lua Experiment

[Pau Garcia i Quiles]

Quoting Ken Martin <ken.martin at kitware.com>:

> I doubt seriously we will adopt a second language in CMake. There is no
> question of maintaining the current language. It has to and will be kept in
> CMake. It was very easy to add Lua to CMake which is nice (literally it was
> probably 15 hours of effort). Part of this experiment was to see if it was
> even programtically practical to add a second language. It turns out it is.
> Doing a complete nice integration would be pretty easy except for variables
> and syntax. That is where the two approaches significantly differ and as
> others have posted that is one place where CMake currently does not scale
> well. For those of us accustomed to functions and local variables the macro
> command is not quite right. We do need to address the variable/scope issue
> in CMake and I am sure we will. Starting from scratch I would use Lua for
> all the benefits a mature language provides, but adding it (or transitioning
> to it) I *suspect* is not worth it. (although part of me thinks in the long
> ten-year-out view it is worth it) Sometimes these issues take a while to
> gel.

Just to make it totally clear as I was the one who "tell you off": if  
the future of CMake is Lua, then I am totally in and for it. But in  
that case, please, please remove the current language.

Every time someone creates a new Linux distribution, database engine  
or programming language to unify them all, it's a new one I have to  
learn and support.

About regular expressions, I have started an implementation of regular  
expressions using PCRE 7.4 and the official PCRE C++ bindings (the  
ones contributed by Google last year).


-- 
Pau Garcia i Quiles
http://www.elpauer.org
(Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer)