Boost logo

Boost :

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-10-22 09:56:30

At 08:45 PM 10/12/01 +0300, Peter Dimov wrote:

>From: <williamkempf_at_[hidden]>
>> Well, from a Windows perspective, the Jam solution is lightyears
>> better then make + autoconf, since we don't have autoconf and though
>> we do have variants of make they are all a pain to maintain in
>> comparison to Jam.
>Let's not forget the big picture. From a Windows perspective nothing
>prebuilt libraries. :-)

If there was just one version of one compiler involved, that wouldn't be
too difficult, although there are a lot of build variants possible. It
gets really messy providing prebuilt libs when there are multiple versions
of multiple compilers.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at