Re: [boost] [Python] Fails for gcc-cygwin-3.4.4

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-15 14:18:16

[How did this message end up on the boost developers' list?  I set the
followup-to header so that it would go to boost-build, *and* I
explicitly asked for followups to go there at the top of my previous
message.]

on Wed Feb 21 2007, Vladimir Prus <ghost-AT-cs.msu.su> wrote:

> David Abrahams wrote:
>
>> * If we drop the ability to arbitrarily choose a version string, we
>>   need a way to identify different configurations of a toolset that
>>   may have the same version number.  For example:
>> 
>>   - You may have both Cygwin and MinGW gcc 3.4 installed
>> 
>>   - You may want to experiment with a special gcc build having C++0x
>>     features
>> 
>>   - You may need a convenient way to identify a special configuration
>>     of an existing toolset.
>> 
>>   The solution we came up with is to add an optional argument to
>>   "using" that allows you to create a special toolset subfeature
>>   on-the-fly, something like:
>> 
>>       using gcc : 3.4 : /usr/local/conceptgcc/bin/g++ : conceptgcc ;
>> 
>>   This feature could then also be used to identify the toolset on the
>>   command-line, something like:
>> 
>>      bjam toolset=conceptgcc
>
> I'm actually not sure if using "toolset=XXX" like this to alias
> to some other set of properties is good idea -- we might end up
> with lots of corner cases. 

What kind of corner cases?

> I'd much rather have some "user-defined" subfeature,

Yeah, that's exactly what 

       using gcc : 3.4 : /usr/local/conceptgcc/bin/g++ : conceptgcc ;

is supposed to create.  Or at least, a value of an implicit
user-defined subfeature, e.g. <flavor>conceptgcc

> and then use:
>
>         gcc-3.4-conceptgcc,

Fine.

> or maybe
>
>         gcc-3.4 flavour=conceptgcc

I don't like that one, because, for example, you might want to build
with plain gcc-3.4 as well as the conceptgcc flavor.

> or maybe
>
>         gcc-3.4 <some-better-feature-name>=conceptgcc

The US English spelling of flavor is shorter.

    "spin?"
    "charm?"

Just kidding; I think "flavor" is fine.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com