Re: [boost] Re: configuration problems

From: David Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-03-15 22:01:56

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]>

> Compare the alternatives:
>
> (1)
>
> config.hpp hand-tailored for configure-challenged platforms
> config.hpp hand-tailored for configure-able platforms
>
> (2)
>
> config.hpp hand-tailored for configure-challenged platforms
> config.hpp automatically generated for configure-able platforms
>
> Now please explain how is (1) better than (2). :-)

A less-complicated system overall, for one thing. Of course, if there are
too many things we fail to get right with the simple system, the simplicity
isn't worth it. I'm not sure where we stand in that regard at the moment,
but I'm reluctant to complicate things without good cause.

BTW, it is my impression that STLport was using autoconf for this sort of
thing but abandoned it in favor of hand-tailored configuration.