I’ll typically setup what I call a tripple-tree, or a quad-tree layout. Each project has three top level tree structures that represent a phase of “Getting it done”. Hacking it, building it, and distributing it.
A source directory (typically src or Source), that houses the projects code, and basically everything you/I want under version control. Structure varies but I tend to create modular bundles out of habit.
A build directory (typically Build/Architecture/OS or Build/Architecture.OS), that houses all essential build time files for that configuration, that won’t be distributed. I test builds against multiple Operating Systems, and synchronise the work directory between machines; so being able to have builds of each concurrently tucked away is a bonus. Sometimes I go further and subdivide the build tree into different configurations, such as Release/Optimised/Debug builds, but I rarely have need to.
A distribution directory (typically Dist/Architecture/OS or Dist/Architecture.OS), that contains all the files needed for a user to simply extract to a folder on that given system, and run the program. Worth while for me, for the same reasons as the build tree, plus the added benefit of simple a zip/tar installation!
Sometimes I also create a fourth tree called ‘Vendor’ or ‘Deps’, that functions like the source tree, but instead contains the code for whatever libs are required. Plus customised project files/build scripts to compile them when needed.
Oh so many people ship IDE project files that reek of laziness or brain damage. Me, I’m so damn lazy that I don’t want to have to explain it, in fact, I don’t even want to edit it later. I just want the thing to *work* when I tell it to build sth. It takes time to do it that way, but it is usually worth it. At least, for cross-platform freaks like me.
Programming is a subject that I do take seriously.