From: Braden N. McDaniel (braden_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-02-29 04:50:10
On 29 Feb 2000, Raja R Harinath wrote:
> One problem with the "config.hpp generated by configure.in" approach
> is that the installation is tailored to one compiler -- the compiler
> used to configure the package. It usually isn't a problem in the C
> world, but it definitely is a problem in the C++ world. Many people
> often have multiple, incompatible, C++ compilers.
This still is not an issue. Configuration is done right before compiling.
Doing things like check what compiler is in use and modulate certain
defines and the like is *exactly* what configure is supposed to do, and
the need for this is by no means unique to C++ compilers.
Distributions which are preconfigured but not compiled are, AFAICT, simply
> So, for example, if
> you configure with Cygwin using GNU C++, you may not be able to use
> MSVC on the same install, and vice versa.
I don't think autoconf supports MSVC. And besides, MSVC users are probably
going to want project files.
PS: Note that I am still not advocating an autoconf-generated config
header, as that would mean just One More File that would need
platform-specific versions (that is, a version particular to each platform
not covered by autoconf). I suspect the existing config.hpp will be
adequate and usable with autoconf.
-- Braden N. McDaniel braden_at_[hidden] <URL:http://www.endoframe.com>
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk