Re: [boost] Release Tools Analysis Part I: Build systems

From: Stefan Seefeld (seefeld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-06 06:29:42

Ames, Andreas (Andreas) wrote:

> FWIW, I think one of the most obviously lacking parts of scons compared
> to Boost.Build is the lack of 'features', i.e. tool independent (command 
> line) option descriptors. (IMHO, the build file language, i.e. python -><-
> 'bjam-script', outweighs this disadvantage.  Just consider the ease of
> adding a new build tool to scons, for example.)

I would phrase it differently:

SCons lacks a robust structure in its definition of 'tools' (there is no
intermediate language to define features in a tool-independent way),
making it rather hard to maintain and develop. That this lack of
structure makes it seemingly easy to add new tools is a side-effect
of that deficiency.

But we are getting off-topic. This belongs more and more on the scons
developer's list...

Regards,
                Stefan

-- 
      ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...