Re: [AD] 3 minor suggestions about our cmake build

[Peter Wang <novalazy@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2008-12-30, Elias Pschernig <elias.pschernig@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 1. static/debug examples?
> 
> Right now, it seems a bit arbitrary what examples I get if I build
> multiple library versions at once. I think we also should compile
> multiple versions of the examples in that case, and always name them
> accordingly, so:
> 
> ex_blend
> ex_blend-debug
> ex_blend-profile
> ex_blend-static
> ex_blend-static-debug
> ex_blend-static-profile
>
> 2. Why build twice by default?
> 
> I think only the shared release build should be built by default, having
> everything compiled twice by cmake as is done right now likely will look
> strange to new users. (And everyone who does serious development will
> have to run cmake-gui and check the "debug" option, so they certainly
> can do that for the much less likely case that they also want the static
> library.)

I don't mind if you change it.

> 3. Why the GRADE_* variables?
> 
> Having finally read the cmake documentation, it seems they always assume
> that there is only one build type (CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE =
> Debug/Release/RelWithDebInfo/...) per output build directory, and
> especially when talking about VC they seem to discourage a solution like
> our current GRADE_DEBUG/GRADE_STANDARD. Should we follow them or keep
> going with our custom GRADE_ variables?

When I wrote that, I didn't know it would cause problems with VC.
I like being able to install the debug and release configurations in a
single step, but it's not important enough not to go with the official
way of doing things.  So yes, change it.

Peter