You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It's something I've considered but the thing is that I want to maintain tight control over what is built and how and I'm somewhat wary that's viable longer-term when the CMakeLists.txt is auto-generated. I'm not completely opposed to the idea, however.
Google GN and the BUILD.gn structure is pretty much equivalent to CMake. It takes a procedural/declarative description of the product and generates >one< build system from it. The output is already customized based on host and target architectures and various generation-time knobs.
This is not what I think Ben wants. He'd like to have all the same customization/etc. in CMake, not BUILD.gn.
Unfortunately, what's in the BUILD.gn files is >procedural< and it gets evaluated. We'd need to hack GN to not execute the BUILD.gn closures but to convert their logic into CMake code. I'm thinking this is REALLY not trivial.
I've got a modified gn_to_make.py that can make the inclusion of additional pieces of v8 a lot more mechanical, but it still takes a bunch of intelligence to figure this out.
In the long run, will be possible we auto generate
CMakeLists.txt
?I see skia has a script like this
https://github.com/google/skia/blob/master/gn/gn_to_cmake.py
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: