From: Daryle Walker (darylew_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-05-27 18:07:57
on 5/27/01 1:16 PM, Vesa Karvonen at vesa.karvonen_at_[hidden] wrote:
> I propose the following names for the schemes:
> - external config (the strictly isolating scheme)
> - dispatching config (the STLPort scheme)
> - internal config (the current Boost scheme)
> IMO, it is necessary to change the <boost/config.hpp> design,
> because of the known problems inherent in using an internal config.
> The more difficult issue is how it should be done. The following is
> my proposal:
> All new platforms would use an external config. In case the
> detection code in <boost/config.hpp> fails, it should give an #error
> that points to information on how to:
> - download the latest boost version and
> - use an existing external config or
> - implement and submit a new external config.
> The current <boost/config.hpp> would be supported for the
> implementations that it currently supports. When new versions of
> implementations become available, they would switch to using an
> external config exclusively.
> The current <boost/config.hpp> would be changed to a dispatching
> config. The dispatch code would dispatch to an external config for
> the platform. This way it would be possible for a user to avoid the
> problems caused by updates to the current <boost/config.hpp> by
> explicitly making sure that the external config is used directly.
Could you give us an example "config.hpp" and matching "config" subdirectory
(just one or two configuration files), possibly in the vault?
-- Daryle Walker Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie darylew AT mac DOT com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk