CODEWITHSUNDEEP
visual-c++cmakeprojects-and-solutions
Martin Ba
Martin Ba

Reputation: 38785

(How) does a cmake configuration differ conceptually from a Visual-C++ project file?

To get from C++ sourcecode to a binary module, the process is roughly as follows:

set_of_source_files[a.cpp, b.cpp, ...] // conceptually, it doesn't matter where these are

          ||
          || Compiler  <- [compiler_settings]
          \/

set_of_object_files

          ||
          || Linker  <- [linker_settings]
          \/

binary module (dynamic library or executable)

Now, I know Visual Studio projects, they

I don't know cmake, but apparently(?), the info one configures with cmake differs slightly from the info one puts into vc[x]proj files.

Is a "cmake configuration" just a differently formatted "vcproj file" or is there a conceptual difference? (Except for the obvious one (I assume) that the info I put into a cmake configuration is platform independent.)

An alternative twist to this question would be to answer -- in the context of above -- why/if(?) one would switch to cmake when only compiling for Windows with Visual-C++.

Upvotes: 2

Views: 80

Answers (1)

Jerry Coffin
Jerry Coffin

Reputation: 490178

Cmake is a cross-platform make -- it starts from a set of source files and a relatively abstract set of directions about what to do with them. Based on those, it generates a set of platform-specific files. If you specify Windows/Visual Studio as the target, it can/will generate a vx[x]proj file for you to use.

Even if you're only using Visual C++ on Windows, it's possible you could benefit from cmake. The obvious possibility would be if you want to target a number of different versions of Visual Studio, and be able to directly generate the correct files for each, instead of generating files for the oldest version you want to support, and then depend on Visual Studio's upgrade feature to convert those to the target version.

Based on my experience with VS's upgrade capability (not particularly great), I'd say that could/would be a reasonable and valid use.

Upvotes: 2

Related Questions