Autoconf vs CMake

Professional comparison and analysis to help you choose the right software solution for your needs. Compare features, pricing, pros & cons, and make an informed decision.

Autoconf icon
Autoconf
CMake icon
CMake

Expert Analysis & Comparison

Struggling to choose between Autoconf and CMake? Both products offer unique advantages, making it a tough decision.

Autoconf is a Development solution with tags like configuration, portability, automation.

It boasts features such as Portability, Extensibility, Automatic dependency tracking, Support for conditional compilation, Built-in caching, Macro language and pros including Makes software portable across Unix-like systems, Allows customization through macros, Automates tedious configuration tasks, Avoids manual editing of configuration files, Reuses previous configuration results.

On the other hand, CMake is a Development product tagged with build, compile, crossplatform, open-source.

Its standout features include Cross-platform build system, Generate native makefiles and workspaces, Support multiple compilers and IDEs, Modular architecture, Customizable and extensible, and it shines with pros like Simplifies build process across platforms, Compiler-independent builds, Large user and developer community, Widely used and well-supported, Highly customizable.

To help you make an informed decision, we've compiled a comprehensive comparison of these two products, delving into their features, pros, cons, pricing, and more. Get ready to explore the nuances that set them apart and determine which one is the perfect fit for your requirements.

Why Compare Autoconf and CMake?

When evaluating Autoconf versus CMake, both solutions serve different needs within the development ecosystem. This comparison helps determine which solution aligns with your specific requirements and technical approach.

Market Position & Industry Recognition

Autoconf and CMake have established themselves in the development market. Key areas include configuration, portability, automation.

Technical Architecture & Implementation

The architectural differences between Autoconf and CMake significantly impact implementation and maintenance approaches. Related technologies include configuration, portability, automation.

Integration & Ecosystem

Both solutions integrate with various tools and platforms. Common integration points include configuration, portability and build, compile.

Decision Framework

Consider your technical requirements, team expertise, and integration needs when choosing between Autoconf and CMake. You might also explore configuration, portability, automation for alternative approaches.

Feature Autoconf CMake
Overall Score N/A N/A
Primary Category Development Development
Target Users Developers, QA Engineers QA Teams, Non-technical Users
Deployment Self-hosted, Cloud Cloud-based, SaaS
Learning Curve Moderate to Steep Easy to Moderate

Product Overview

Autoconf
Autoconf

Description: Autoconf is an extensible package of M4 macros that produce shell scripts to automatically configure software source code packages. It can adapt the software to many kinds of Unix-like systems without manual user intervention.

Type: Open Source Test Automation Framework

Founded: 2011

Primary Use: Mobile app testing automation

Supported Platforms: iOS, Android, Windows

CMake
CMake

Description: CMake is an open-source, cross-platform tool designed to build, test, and package software. It works by generating native makefiles and workspaces to automate the build process using a compiler-independent method.

Type: Cloud-based Test Automation Platform

Founded: 2015

Primary Use: Web, mobile, and API testing

Supported Platforms: Web, iOS, Android, API

Key Features Comparison

Autoconf
Autoconf Features
  • Portability
  • Extensibility
  • Automatic dependency tracking
  • Support for conditional compilation
  • Built-in caching
  • Macro language
CMake
CMake Features
  • Cross-platform build system
  • Generate native makefiles and workspaces
  • Support multiple compilers and IDEs
  • Modular architecture
  • Customizable and extensible

Pros & Cons Analysis

Autoconf
Autoconf
Pros
  • Makes software portable across Unix-like systems
  • Allows customization through macros
  • Automates tedious configuration tasks
  • Avoids manual editing of configuration files
  • Reuses previous configuration results
Cons
  • Complex macro language has steep learning curve
  • Hard to debug issues
  • Can produce convoluted configuration scripts
  • Limited support on non-Unix platforms
CMake
CMake
Pros
  • Simplifies build process across platforms
  • Compiler-independent builds
  • Large user and developer community
  • Widely used and well-supported
  • Highly customizable
Cons
  • Steep learning curve
  • Complex syntax and concepts
  • Poor documentation
  • Limited IDE integration on some platforms
  • Build times can be slow for large projects

Pricing Comparison

Autoconf
Autoconf
  • Open Source
CMake
CMake
  • Open Source

Get More Information

Autoconf
Autoconf
Autoconf
Learn More About Autoconf
CMake
CMake
CMake
Learn More About CMake

Ready to Make Your Decision?

Explore more software comparisons and find the perfect solution for your needs

Browse More Software
Back to Homepage
Company
Explore
Resources

Ditch the guesswork.

© 2025 Sugggest.com. All Rights Reserved.
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Cookie Policy Legal