> That's not particularly a shell string, but a DEFINE
Ah I am guessing that you are invoking the compiler using ‘sh’ (or cmd.exe on win). Otherwise you wouldn’t need the extra quotes. But then you should properly quote for the posix shell.
Though you could exec the compiler but then you could probably keep it as a list.
> I'm not sure whether it is a decent approach to add yet another layer to cmake
Yah that’s the problem. Especially with large legacy build systems.
> (the parser would then likely be written in cmake language and all the legacy would still have to be present for backward compatibility,
Well I think they meant it’d built on the c++ layer. But it’d still need the old cmake language parser still.
Ah I am guessing that you are invoking the compiler using ‘sh’ (or cmd.exe on win). Otherwise you wouldn’t need the extra quotes. But then you should properly quote for the posix shell.
Though you could exec the compiler but then you could probably keep it as a list.
> I'm not sure whether it is a decent approach to add yet another layer to cmake
Yah that’s the problem. Especially with large legacy build systems.
> (the parser would then likely be written in cmake language and all the legacy would still have to be present for backward compatibility,
Well I think they meant it’d built on the c++ layer. But it’d still need the old cmake language parser still.