+1. I started using premake before the introjucer existed, and still use it as of today.
Incredibly simple, fast, cross platform. Much better than cmake, and consorts !
[quote=“dinaiz”]+1. I started using premake before the introjucer existed, and still use it as of today.
Incredibly simple, fast, cross platform. Much better than cmake, and consorts ![/quote]
My main problem with premake[1] is that, as with all of these things, it just don’t play nice with others. I don’t hold that against premake itself, rather a its just a sign of how use-only some of the configurators are. CMake, for all its warts, has the market momentum though, so many big libraries only talk CMake.
If I was writing a project that was entirely free of big third party libraries (with the exception of Boost which is for the most part rather laid back), I’d pick premake in a heartbeat. Otherwise, I find myself usually stuck using CMake.
[1] as a general rule for me, anything that features Lua is already 20% more awesome.
[quote=“valley”][quote=“dinaiz”]+1. I started using premake before the introjucer existed, and still use it as of today.
Incredibly simple, fast, cross platform. Much better than cmake, and consorts ![/quote]
My main problem with premake[1] is that, as with all of these things, it just don’t play nice with others. I don’t hold that against premake itself, rather a its just a sign of how use-only some of the configurators are. CMake, for all its warts, has the market momentum though, so many big libraries only talk CMake.
If I was writing a project that was entirely free of big third party libraries (with the exception of Boost which is for the most part rather laid back), I’d pick premake in a heartbeat. Otherwise, I find myself usually stuck using CMake.
[1] as a general rule for me, anything that features Lua is already 20% more awesome.[/quote]
However, it’s really easy to build a premake script for other libraries. That’s what we do btw (except for boost, like you)