Open avislash opened 3 years ago
Hi @jannotti, any thoughts on the proposed changes above?
I don't really see the point. C++ appears to lack any sort of strong convention on packaging libraries. Where I've used this, I've just copied the one directory into place. It's not great, but it's not that bad either. I've tried hard to become convinced, but I read just as much about cmake, as scons, and bazel. If a simple Makefile is enough, I'd rather keep it that way.
H @jannotti, just wanted to circle back on this.
There are a couple of reasons I'm advocating for a CMake build system:
If after this you still don't think this is the right direction then I'm happy to concede. close this issue, and keep things the way they are.
Thanks, Avi
I want to propose that we restructure the repo so that all of the header files are contained within an
include
directory, source files are within asrc
directory and that tests are within atest
directory.After restructuring I propose that we swap out the current makefile for a CMake build system.
This change will allow the SDK to be presented as a cohesive library that can be checked out and easily integrated into any IDE or development environment and built with CMake. The CMake build system will take all of the files in this repo and produce a single library called libAlgo++ (I'm open to suggestions on the library name).