Re: Why Jam?

From: rogeeff (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-23 21:53:13

--- In boost_at_y..., Braden McDaniel <braden_at_e...> wrote:
[...]

> As I see it, these are the issues:
> 
>         * There are scalability problems with a configuration 
header of
>           the ilk Boost uses. These scalability problems are why
>           autoconf exists. It is apparent at this point, though, 
that
>           the Boost maintainers do not feel that they're hitting the
>           ceiling with the configuration header approach. So there 
is
>           not motivation to move to autoconf or a similar tool on 
this
>           ground. IMO, it's entirely appropriate to dismiss 
arguments to
>           move to autoconf on this basis.

Following is IMHO:

I know at least one significant C++ project that WAS using configure 
script and STOP doing that: STLPort. Boost in some sence close to the 
same position. Boost should never RELY on configuration scripts, 
instead the configuration should be performed in a headers using 
ifdefs. Boost libraries autors MAY provide such scripts for 
convinience or may not. If we take out make (use Jam) and 
configuration what do we left with? Install. What do we discuss here: 
how to automate copying file from one location to another?

I may be missing a lot of points, but I did not hear them before. 
Could you list a concrete issues then: what do you need to install 
boost?

> -- 
> Braden McDaniel                           e-mail: <braden_at_e...>
> <http://endoframe.com>                    Jabber: <braden_at_j...>

Gennadiy.