Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. PO
    primarykey
    data
    text
    singulars
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    plurals
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. VO
      singulars
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
    2. VO
      singulars
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. COI can't agree with make. It doesn't offer anything you can't get anywhere else, doesn't fit with modern IDEs, doesn't have many tools built-in (you'll likely have the same command-line-tool-dependency I describe in my answer, which is really bad for platform-independence), and is not really elegant, especially compared to recent build systems (or generators like CMake). It's a well-justified opinion to prefer make, so it's not a -1, but it's not +1 either (for me), simply because I can't imagine any of our projects that would have benefitted from manually using make instead of CMake.
      singulars
    2. COIt it's simple idea, that puts Make out of the competition. It fits perfectly fine at least into Eclipse & Visual Studio development model. Unlike CMake and other "build system generators" you are manipulating the behavior of the build system directly, not via features&bugs of the generator. It's also worth to say that for C++ development and three platforms you only need to specify 30 command lines (compile, link lib, link bin, static/shared, debug/opt) x (Linux, Win, MAC), which is exactly 30 lines of code, and you don't have the overhead of using 5% of the "generic build system".
      singulars
    3. CONow add fetching, unpacking and configuring all build prerequisites and fully deploy the build and I'll bet 30 lines won't be enough, especially for different environments. One of our CMake projects calls 50+ CLI commands, of which none is for basic stuff like compiling. I also can't agree with make fitting into the Visual Studio development model - you have to maintain the makefile(s) and the solution side-by-side, while with CMake, you have only one source for both. In my opinion, the time for command-line based build scripts is over. "Direct control" also means "more work to do".
      singulars
 

Querying!

 
Guidance

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload