| |
| |
On 9/19/20 8:57 PM Theodore wrote:
I chose the "configure" path because I was thinking to use Make instead
of CMake, I have the impression that it's a simpler tool for simpler
projects.
But if you say that CMake is the future... then I have to think again...
Greg replied already and I second everything he wrote.
Just to clarify things: CMake is not a replacement for make. Despite its
similar name it's a replacement for configure. You have two choices to
build FLTK:
1) ./configure ; make
2) mkdir build; cd build; cmake .. ; make
This is a little simplified because configure can only provide the build
configuration to be used by make with existing and rather complicated
Makefile's. And configure (autotools, autogen, automake) itself is ...
even more complicated.
CMake however creates entire different BUILD SYSTEMs to be used in the
second step from much easier to grok descriptions (CMakeLists.txt). So
you can use either make, ninja, Visual Studio, Xcode (on macOS) or many
other IDE's as your development environment.
The FLTK team provides you with both configure and CMake files so you
can easily choose whatever you like.
However, if you want to build your own project(s), maybe on different
platforms (Windows, macOS, Linux/Unix) and you're just starting
development, then CMake should be your choice. Creating a cross-platform
CMakeLists.txt is much easier than using autotools (configure) and
writing Makefiles.
Side note: there are other similar build system generator tools like
CMake available as well, but CMake seems to be the most popular one
these days.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "fltk.general" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to fltkgeneral+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/fltkgeneral/9848687b-b4cd-e959-d996-d212d08719e2%40online.de.
[ Direct Link to Message ] | |
|
| |
