[Networkit] Build system discussion: Using CMake instead of SCons

Matteo Riondato matteo at cs.brown.edu
Tue Sep 26 15:19:44 CEST 2017

> On May 8, 2017, at 10:02 AM, Matteo Riondato <matteo at cs.brown.edu> wrote:
>> On May 8, 2017, at 9:35 AM, Moritz von Looz <moritz.looz-corswarem at kit.edu> wrote:
>> CMake seems like a good candidate due to its wide availability and active development.
>> What is your take on this?
> Something I read somewhere at some point: “All build systems suck, but CMake a little less so.”
> Personally I like CMake, although from a language point of view you can immediately feel that it is the result of very organic growth: it’s quirky and there are too many ways to accomplish the same thing.
> FWIW, NetworKit is the only package on my systems that require scons, and on some of these systems I have python2 installed only because of scons, so I’m very in favor of moving away from scons and python2.

Sorry-not-sorry for restarting an old discussion. =)

The new scons 3.0.0 supports Python3.

I  still find CMake much superior to scons, but I’m not willing to put the work in to port NetworKit to it (despite the fact that it shouldn’t be too crazy), so I’ll shut up.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://lists.ira.uni-karlsruhe.de/pipermail/networkit/attachments/20170926/8d85336a/attachment.sig>

More information about the NetworKit mailing list