Re: [Boost-build] [bbv2] RFC: Repeated usage requirements.

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-01 19:42:32

Rene Rivera <grafik.list_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Jürgen Hunold wrote:
>> Hi !
>> 
>> Am Maandag 27 März 2006, 10:11 schrieb Vladimir Prus:
>>> Hi Rene,
>> 
>>> Like Dave, I'm a bit concerned about using <*> which means something
>>> completely different in V1. Maybe, we can just use '*' without '<>'? Or
>>> maybe, some keyword, like "usage". Using just '*' can look like black
>>> magic.
>> 
>> What about naming the section (alike the "project") and then add a section 
>> named "common-requirements" and be done ?
>> This would add its entries to both "requirements" (better 
>> "build-requirements" ?) and "usage-requirements".
>
> After thinking on it for a few days that is certainly one viable route. 
> Also the suggestion to use "build-requirements" for consistency is good. 
> Perhaps that should be added as an alias for "requirements". With that 
> in mind a few other possibilities spring to mind:
>
I think we should keep experimenting.  For example:

  lib foo : foo.cpp
    :
      self:      # the default
        <define>COOL=1

      all:       # or maybe "self+users:"
        <define>ENABLE_LOG=1

      users:
        <link>shared:<define>BUILD_DLL=1
    ;

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