DNF 3: better performance and a move to C++

Posted Apr 9, 2018 2:18 UTC (Mon) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523)
In reply to: DNF 3: better performance and a move to C++ by halla
Parent article: DNF 3: better performance and a move to C++

You're suffering from Stockholm syndrome.

CMake is crap. It's a slightly better crap than most other C++ build systems but it's still crap compared to modern build systems for other languages.

to post comments

DNF 3: better performance and a move to C++

Posted Apr 9, 2018 2:37 UTC (Mon) by pizza (subscriber, #46) [Link] (1 responses)

Your comparison is as poignant as complaining that an exotic sports car doesn't work well for hauling loads of rock around the local quarry.

Different tools for different purposes; is that really so hard to comprehend?

DNF 3: better performance and a move to C++

Posted Apr 9, 2018 12:10 UTC (Mon) by HelloWorld (guest, #56129) [Link]

> Your comparison is as poignant as complaining that an exotic sports car doesn't work well for hauling loads of rock around the local quarry.
Since Cyberax didn't make a comparison, I guess you meant to respond to me.

> Different tools for different purposes
Here's my question? How exactly does the purpose of CMake – building C and C++ programs – necessitate a custom programming language for your build system that has “functions” that can't return values, doesn't have any useful data structures and is generally weird and quirky?
The answer is it doesn't, hence “different purposes” don't justify anything here.