<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 5/9/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Rob Mathews</b> <<a href="mailto:Rob.Mathews@varolii.com">Rob.Mathews@varolii.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
I understand your point, but the Visual Studio itself doesn't really<br>support more than one project in one directory. Ok, you can force it via<br>tricks like this, but that's not the beaten path for most VC developers.
</blockquote><div><br><br>Whether most people do it or not is unimportant. What's important, is it is correctly handled when someone does do it. I've seen open source projects that do it. Especially, it happens when Unix developers port things to MSVC and just do the 1st project structure that comes to mind, or is driven by legacy concerns, rather than what the mainstream from scratch MSVC developers are doing. Accepting variance in development cultures is part of the drill of a truly cross-platform tool.
<br> </div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">For example, the wizard always makes a new directory.<br><br>Rather, they are used to the current directory structure that VC
<br>generates.<br>True, that directory structure has a bug that this fix addresses, but<br>from my POV I'd rather have a switch - call it<br>"USE_BROKEN_VC7_DIRECTORY_STRUCTURE" if you want - that causes Cmake to
<br>extrude the traditional directory layout.</blockquote><div><br><br>Why? What job are you trying to get done that really requires this? Any switch like this introduces a new maintenance burden, yet another test case that someone has to consider, yet another gratuitous incompatibility, yet another thing that can break because of someone's lack of RTFM, etc. Do you desire a standard API for getting some specific piece of information that you actually want? That's what I desire, for "faked" convenience libraries.
<br><br>If what you're really saying, is you like using scripting languages outside of CMake on directory structures that are always named the way mainstream MSVC users expect, I think you're asking too much. A personal preference for nomenclature is not a sufficient reason for a feature request. It should be a standard that everybody benefits from and actually works for everybody. Even the corner cases that you don't personally put much weight on.
<br><br><br>Cheers,<br>Brandon Van Every<br></div></div><br>