[Cmake] cmSourceFilesCommand : SOURCE_FILES NAME file AS target

[Bill Hoffman]

At 02:29 PM 5/14/2001 +0000, sebastien at barre.nom.fr wrote:

I think the depends will be fine.   However, it would not be trivial
to implement your changes in the generators.   For example, the Microsoft
projects do not have a rule per c++ file that we can change.  So changing
the output name of an individual target will not be easy.  Also, I would like
to make writing new generators as easy as possible.   The code to output
different .o files or .obj files differs from compiler to compiler, and dsps,
and make systems.

-Bill
  

>Correct me if I'm wrong, but will the dependency be generated correctly ?
>I.e, if I modify vtkRenderWidget.cxx, will vtkTkRenderWidgetPyhton.cxx be
>recompiled automatically ? I do not know how the dependency are computed by
>CMake, and I'm not on my computer right now. I think the #include
>"whatever.cxx" inside a .cxx is a bit dangerous for that reason. And we all
>know how some dependency problems in the old tree have lead many of us to
>several hours spent trying to locate simple problems :) 
>
>If you think it's OK, than it's fine to me, I'll "cvs add" the files in the
>new tree, and add them to CMakeLists.txt. 
>
>Although I'm fairly sure this extension to SOURCE_FILES would be useful,
>I'd like to say that I sincerely think that the cmSourceFile class need at
>least a GetTargetName() member, even if it returns the source name for the
>moment. It seems logical in an API point of view that when someone wants
>the target name of the source file it should calls such GetTargetName, and
>not necesseraly GetSourceName. If we want to make this change, we probably
>have to make it quickly, before there are hundreds of calls to
>GetSourceName :) Just my opinion anyway.
>
>Thanks
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Cmake mailing list
>Cmake at public.kitware.com
>http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/cmake