From: Toon Knapen (toon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-03-18 09:41:34
David Abrahams wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Toon Knapen" <toon_at_[hidden]>
> > Jeremy Siek wrote:
> > >
> > > Wow, jam does look pretty cool. I love how it has the equivalent of
> > > "makedepend" built right in.
> > My only concern/question here is if we would stil be able
> > to take a 'Component Based Development' approach.
> Still? Is that something we have a special facility for today?
I left out one 'l'. I should indeed have left out the 's','t','i'
and the first 'l' also.
> > The dependencies of one component/library upon others needs to be
> > decided at design-time. (e.g. in my projects the makefile of the
> > module decides of which other modules files can be included)
> > Adding the real '#include's is done at implementation time.
> > But include's are quickly added to just make it compile instead
> > of trying to understand the consequences of this extra include.
> > Thus including a file of a module/lib which was not intended
> > to be included at design time should not be compile-able.
> > However, tools like makedepend tend to make it even
> > more easier to make this kind of mistake ?
> If you consider that a mistake, surely avoiding makedepend does nothing to
> prevent it! Avoiding makedepend or an equivalent only causes confusion
> /much/ later during maintenance when, say config.hpp is changed to fix a bug
> but the regression tests still fail.
> > (but on the other hand even Ratrional's SCM has
> > no support for a CBD approach)
> Good point. Let's not complicate things by demanding that our build tool
> satisfy requirements which have never been seen in any build tool on earth!
> If you want to add some support for CBD to boost, please feel free to make a
> proposal. In the meantime, finding a portable, powerful build tool has been
> enough of a challenge that I'm just praying Jam will fulfill its apparent
There are build-tools which allow for a CBS approach. I've worked with
/codeveloped some. However, all these tools were strongly platform
dependent thus I have other suggestion for now. And I agree with you
that one should only critisize one tool if one knows at the same time
a better option (which is not the case here) but I just wanted to
raise the 'CBD' question (but hey, since Jam is open-source, someday
we might add that functionality if other people would also be
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk