Date: 2001-06-08 08:54:33
--- In boost_at_y..., jk_at_s... wrote:
> 6 Jun 2001 19:29:49 +0400 David Abrahams ÎÁÐÉÓÁÌ:
> >Have you bothered to read my previous response to your suggestion
> >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/message/12558 where I
mentioned that the
> >boost membership rejected a requirement that anything as heavy-
> >Python be installed for our build?
> But I'd rather install "heavy-duty" (and useful otherwise) thing
> than totally useless *for me* Jam (because I'm using GNU make). In
> I must to install something (well, Python is already installed :).
> (I'm not criticizing your work.)
The problem is, Python is a *heavy* installation, where as Jam is
small. In fact, on my system after bootstrapping the total space
requirement for using Jam is only 140 KB. I can justify installation
of such a tool for building libraries. It's much harder to justify
installing Python, which takes a lot of space, for automating builds
only (i.e. if I had other reasons for using Python it would be more
justifiable... but most users don't have other reasons).
I know the Python users think this is the best approach to take, but
I'm sorry, I just can't agree. This has been debated, and Python
lost, so let's move on and stop beating the dead horse.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk