[CMake] QtCreator project generator

[Campbell Barton]

On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Campbell Barton <ideasman42 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Marcus D. Hanwell
> <marcus.hanwell at kitware.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 9:15 AM, John Drescher <drescherjm at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 6:45 AM, Campbell Barton <ideasman42 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> QT-Creator which currently supports CMake by reading code::blocks project files.
>>>>
>>>> The problem with this is code::blocks project files don't write in
>>>> #defines, so the IDE shows #ifdef's incorrecyly.
>>>>
>>>> For the short term I wrote a eclipse -> qtcreator project converter in
>>>> python, which has a few hard coded values but could easily be made
>>>> generic.
>>>> http://www.pasteall.org/19595/python
>>>>
>>>> So I was wondering if CMake developers would accept a patch to add
>>>> native generation of qtcreator project files?
>>>>
>>>> An alternative solutions could be to write defines into code::blocks
>>>> files, or for qtcreator to read in eclipse files instead but qtcreator
>>>> project files are quite simple to write so if this feature is
>>>> acceptable I was thinking to try and write a patch.
>>>
>>> Recent versions of QtCreator use CMakeLists.txt directly? Is there
>>> something missing in this functionality?
>>>
>> You can open a CMakeLists.txt as a project, this then uses the CMake
>> plugin to create a build directory, use the CodeBlocks - Unix
>> Makefiles generator and then add a CMakeLists.txt.user with some
>> project settings. As stated, it lacks the #defines, although this is
>> less pronounced in many of the projects I work on where configured
>> headers are used.
>>
>> I am not a core CMake developer, but it seems to me that extending the
>> CodeBlocks generator would be the right thing to do here (if that is
>> feasible). I think Alexander Neundorf did a lot of this work,
>> hopefully he will comment.
>>
>> Marcus
>
> Looked into this further and there is really no problem with
> code::blocks generator,
> The way it works is it calls make directly, so there is no need for
> the code::blocks file to contain defines.
> <Build command="/usr/bin/make -f .....>
>
> If you take a CMake generated code::blocks project and try edit the
> settings there is no way you can add defines, which makes me think
> that CMake adding them would be incorrect.
>
> Before I discovered this I made a patch which adds the defines (which
> code::blocks wont use).
> http://www.graphicall.org/ftp/ideasman42/code_blocks.diff
>
> All things considered I still think a QtCreator project generator is
> the way to go.

Hi, my original questions is still unanswered.
I'm not familiar with how the CMake project goes about these decisions.

Are there any developers on this list who might review patches for new
project generators?
If so, any idea if this would be acceptable functionality to add?