Re: On Boost and modules

From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-04-10 17:27:55

On 4/10/24 10:08 AM, Boris Kolpackov via Boost wrote:
> Rainer Deyke via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]> writes:

> 
> One thing I can say in build2's defense is that it works: 

works -> can be made to work.

I understand the vision for b2 and have been using it with boost for 
more than 20 years.  It's complex - arguably to complex. It's still 
under constant development.  I only update and rebuild it occasionally. 
But when I do, there's almost always some sort of issue which requires 
going to the list or slack/boost. Eventually I get this to work and it's 
quite satisfactory.  Basically, the development process for b2 is not 
resulting in a reliable product.

Addressing this is a job that is difficult and underrated.  I would like 
to see CMake efforts culminate in a result which can replace b2.  But 
that doesn't seem to be progressing either.

> what otherC++ build toolchains can you use that would allow you to build an
> application that depends on, say, both Boost and Qt (and all their
> dependencies, recursively) with a single build system reliably and
> uniformly across all the major platforms and compiler (including
> Windows)?
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>