Though, I guess, my main reason for bitching about it is the scripting language -- there's just no reason for it to be that crap. It's not quite autotools-m4 crap, but that's not for a lack of trying.
I agree. They apparently thought a very simple DSL will suffice and when it didn't, hacked in Turing-completeness. The result is quite like every other time somebody started building DSL from scratch instead of embedding it into a suitable general-purpose language (). Unfortunately is has piled many features and got endorsed by several IDEs, so it's likely to stay around for long time.
I've used it for two smaller projects now, and I like it.
But how complex were the project. The real test for this kind of tools is how it deals with custom build steps (in CMake OK, though a bit weird), cross-compilation (CMake manages, but far from well) and such.
A rant for another time: Visual Studio users that have used to IDE for multiple years, but couldn't create a new solution+project from scratch to save their lives.
That might be because it's actually a major pain and a pile of . Trivial solution with just Win32 platform and Debug and Release configurations mostly works, but when you want something more (like include .NET projects (that use Any CPU platform), other platforms (like Windows Embedded or Windows Phone) or other configuration (like a separate one for unit tests)), Visual Studio tends to totally break the configuration settings every time you try to add a project or do other significant changes.