[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-users] CMake problem on Linux should be solved

From: felix winkelmann
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] CMake problem on Linux should be solved
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 22:20:12 +0200

On 9/8/06, Brandon J. Van Every <address@hidden> wrote:

 Actually I don't agree.  I didn't do the "write obscure code so that I
remain invaluable" thing, I did rather the opposite.  :-)  The CMake build
is currently feature complete, and it's MIT licensed, so you simply can't
start "from zero."  I've designed, modularized, and commented it well enough
to be used by anyone who has a serious interest in a CMake build system.  In
fact if I spruce it up a bit, and maybe after CMake 2.4.4 ships so I can
remove a workaround or two, it might even serve as good tutorial code for
CMake newbies.  I might promote both CMake and Chicken that way.

A tutorial would be nice. _Here_ is one developer who is eager to learn
more about CMake, and can't afford the book. ;-)

 I could walk away from Chicken right now, or get hit by a truck, and CMake
will prosper if at least 1 person wants to make it prosper.  It's the
cultural questions that plague me, not the technical ones.  The technical
ones are solved.  My tools for getting people to desire CMake are very
limited.  I doubt it'll spread like wildfire because it's just a build, and
people are awfully "inert" (I want to say lazy, but it's more fair /
responsible to say "inert") about what they like to do on a command line.

Well, you are probably one of the very few people outside kitware that grok
CMake, which makes your support crucial, at least at this stage.

 Yes, that matters.  My strategic thought has been, it's BSD licensed code,
and I do have an interest in writing compilers.  So maybe 2 years from now,
I'll know the implementation well enough that in the worst case, it won't
matter to me what Felix is doing.  Right now I'd be toast though.  Chicken
*is* fully understandable by 1 person.  Felix is right to pitch "Chicken is
a small implementation" as one of its advantages, especially compared to
Common Lisp.

Chicken is actually pretty simple. The convoluted coding in the compiler
and elsewhere might distract, though, since I'm more a "getting it to work"
than "make it elegant first" person. But, technically and from a
design point-of-view,
Chicken is dead-simple. This is its greatest strength.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]