MantisBT - CMake
View Issue Details
IDProjectCategoryView StatusDate SubmittedLast Update
0013091CMakeCCMakepublic2012-03-31 19:102012-09-03 16:00
ReporterChristoph Anton Mitterer 
Assigned ToBrad King 
PrioritynormalSeverityfeatureReproducibilityalways
StatusclosedResolutionsuspended 
PlatformOSOS Version
Product Version 
Target VersionFixed in Version 
Summary0013091: add enum like options
DescriptionHi.

I know this is a duplicate of bugs 0007313 and 0001527 and the (not longer existing?) #39.
I also know there is no real way of implementing enums, given the way cmake works.

But can't the following be done:

If for any variable "foo" a variable like "foo_ALLOWED_VALUES" exist, then and UIs (like ccmake, etc.) are allowed to interpret this variable in order to restrict the possible user inputs (yes I know it will still be possible via manual editing and via the command line to set any value).

For the syntax of "foo_ALLOWED_VALUES" I'd recommend a extensible format e.g.:
"<type>:<type-dependent-data>"

Perhaps starting with the two types:
enum
regexp

1) enum could be something like this:
enum:value[|value]*
Where value is a allowed value.

2) regexp: could be something like this:
regexp:<regexp-type>:<expression>
With regexp-type being for example POSIX_BRE for POSIX Basic Regular Expressions, or POSIX_ERE for POSIX Extended Regular Expressions.
Maybe later one could add PCRE.
expression would be the regular expression that must be matched for a value to be allowed.


Why (1)?
(2) would not allow for UIs to make choices (e.g. drop down lists), at least not easily.


Chris.
Steps To Reproduce
Additional Information
TagsNo tags attached.
Relationships
Attached Files
Issue History
Date ModifiedUsernameFieldChange
2012-03-31 19:10Christoph Anton MittererNew Issue
2012-03-31 21:14David ColeNote Added: 0029023
2012-03-31 21:54Christoph Anton MittererNote Added: 0029024
2012-04-09 09:03Brad KingNote Added: 0029096
2012-04-09 09:03Brad KingStatusnew => resolved
2012-04-09 09:03Brad KingResolutionopen => suspended
2012-04-09 09:03Brad KingAssigned To => Brad King
2012-09-03 16:00David ColeNote Added: 0030846
2012-09-03 16:00David ColeStatusresolved => closed

Notes
(0029023)
David Cole   
2012-03-31 21:14   
This is already quite possible.

Please see http://www.kitware.com/blog/home/post/82 [^] for details.
(0029024)
Christoph Anton Mitterer   
2012-03-31 21:54   
Great!
So I could basically re-design the option command with set and a property that allows on and off, right?


So let me re-dedicate this bug to the following tasks:

1) The above should really be better documented, than in a "private" blog.
It's actually in the manpage, but I guess it wouldn't harm if there are:
- a reference at the set command
- a reference at the option command
- FAQ and / or wiki entries


2) It seems to not work yet in ccmake, an honestly I guess most developers stick to the console than to fancy GUI toys.


3) I still believe that the idea with the regular expressions could be worth implementing, of course via the property mechanism.
Shall I open a new bug for this?
(0029096)
Brad King   
2012-04-09 09:03   
Issues 0013083, 0013089, 0013090, 0013091, 0013092, 0013109, and 0013111 are all interesting suggestions but the issue tracker is not a good place to discuss them. The user list is a better place for discussion because it may attract interest from others, and in particular from potential contributors. Others may also suggest alternative solutions.
(0030846)
David Cole   
2012-09-03 16:00   
Closing resolved issues that have not been updated in more than 4 months.