RetroSearch Browse

Mon Apr 13 00:55:21 CEST 2009 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-April/088685.html

On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 20:34:21 +0200, Christian Heimes wrote:

> Hallo Alexander!
> 
> Alexander Neundorf wrote:
>> This of course depends on the definition of "as good as" ;-) Well, I
>> have met Windows-only developers which use CMake because it is able to
>> generate project files for different versions of Visual Studio, and
>> praise it for that.
> 
> So far I haven't heard any complains about or feature requests for the
> project files. ;)

In fact, I have had one.

I asked to put all those big CJK codecs outside of python2x.dll because 
they were too big and create far larger self-contained distributions 
(aka: py2exe/pyinstaller) as would normally be required.

I was replied that it would be unconvienent to do so because of the fact 
that the build system is made by hand and it's hard to generate project 
files for each third party module.

Were those project files generated automatically, changing between 
external modules within or outside python2x dll would be a one-line 
switch in CMakeLists.txt (or similar).
-- 
Giovanni Bajo
Develer S.r.l.
http://www.develer.com

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-April/088685.html below:

[Python-Dev] Evaluated cmake as an autoconf replacement