-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 613
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
add SYMBOL_VISIBILITY cache variable to match scons interface. #1579
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks!
I dont know what the policy on adding notes in comments are.
I can ammend the commit to remove them if they are unwanted.
The comment is good.
CMakeLists.txt
Outdated
# https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Code-Gen-Options.html | ||
# To match the scons options we need to change the text to match the -fvisibility flag | ||
# it is probably worth another PR which changes both to use the flag options | ||
if( ${SYMBOL_VISIBILITY} STREQUAL "auto" OR ${SYMBOL_VISIBILITY} STREQUAL "visible" ) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we need to decide if we are going to standardize on having a GODOT_
prefix for all our options (and so GODOT_SYMBOL_VISIBILITY
), or not.
What do most other cmake projects do?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
SFML also prefixes options with SFML_
(unless they're standardized, e.g. CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE
).
Some macros also have it: sfml_set_option
.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yes prefixing variables is the norm in cmake projects, would you like me to go back and change it, and then submit a PR bringing other options into line?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That would be great!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Execllent, to be clear we will be prefixing everything with GODOT_ yeah ? not GODOT_CPP_?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, let's do GODOT_
- we're already mostly using that one (with a couple exceptions), and there really isn't a world where you have Godot and godot-cpp in the same codebase, so I don't think we'll conflict
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks great, thanks!
Ah, sorry, I didn't notice this when I approved: you need to squash this down to a single commit before I can merge it. This is part of Godot's development workflow: https://docs.godotengine.org/en/latest/contributing/workflow/pr_workflow.html#modifying-a-pull-request |
4c19673
to
02bdc66
Compare
Apologies, commits have been squashed and I'll remember it for next time. |
Thanks! |
Cherry-picked for 4.2 in PR #1631 |
Cherry-picked for 4.3 in PR #1632 |
Bring the 'cmake -LH' output inline with the scons output.
I dont know what the policy on adding notes in comments are.
I can ammend the commit to remove them if they are unwanted.