[CMake] [cmake-developers] Bug fix requests for the *next* release of CMake...

[Olaf van der Spek]

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:45 PM, J Decker <d3ck0r at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 2:22 PM, Olaf van der Spek <olafvdspek at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:13 PM, Michael Wild <themiwi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The problem is that there IS NO CONVENTION on name decoration.
>>
>> Why is that a problem?
>
> well that any convention that YOU want, since there is no standard
> outside of what YOU desire, means you need to apply naming conventions
> to meat YOUR criteria.

I'm still not sure what the problem is.

>>> And yes, especially as a library developer you have to be aware of things.
>>
>> Why?
>>
>
> Becuase it's something YOU desire, that the rest of the world rarely
> uses.  I've seen less than half a dozen projects that attempt to do
> that, and then have to fight with converting their projects to use
> just standard names of libraries I already have (strip off _debug and
> d's appended to library names for no good reason).  The product of a

Why is the -d suffix a problem for you?

> single build type is put in a single place all together, so why would
> there ever be a mixture.  How many libraries under linux actually
> install realease and debug together?

I'm not talking about Linux.

> and under windows there is no
> particular standard for where to install things, so it's entirely open
> for you to manipulate how you want.

Putting libs in the lib dir so the linker can find them sounds like a
good idea to me.

It seems you're saying that since there's no standard yet, we
shouldn't bother to improve the situation at all.

Olaf