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

[felix winkelmann]

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.


cheers,
felix

--
http://galinha.ucpel.tche.br:8081/blog/blog.ssp