Re: Compiling OpenShadingLanguage under Windows


Wormszer <worm...@...>
 

I am fine with either one. I think having something embedded or buildable would be usefull.

Otherwise there maybe issues with different compilers and would probably need some kind of config or something that cmake would generate at least on windows with several versions of VS etc.

Will just have to see how Larry or the other devs feel about using one of those two for Linux builds as well. I would assume it would be wise to have all the preprocessing done with the same tool when possible.

I will look at both real quick but I might lean towards mcpp.

On Jan 20, 2010, at 8:14 PM, Chris Foster <chri...@...> wrote:

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 11:02 AM, Blair Zajac <bl...@...> wrote:
The main annoyance with wave is that it causes the compiler to issue truly
horrendous error messages if you get things wrong (the wave internals make
heavy use of template metaprogramming).
(Obviously this is only a problem when integrating wave into the project
source, and that's not really difficult at all.)

There's mcpp which is designed to be an embeddable C-preprocessor.

Ice, which we use at Sony Imageworks for all our middle-tier systems, uses
mcpp for it's own internal IDL type language, so I would recommend that.
mcpp looks nice. In some sense, using wave would mean one less dependency
since OSL already relies on boost, but it does mean linking to libboost-wave,
so if you have a modular boost install the point may be moot...

~Chris

PS: Sorry to Blair for the duplicate message. I intended to send it
to the list :-(
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OSL Developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to osl...@....
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to osl...@... .
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/osl-dev?hl=en .

Join osl-dev@lists.aswf.io to automatically receive all group messages.