Boost logo

Boost :

From: Markus Werle (numerical.simulation_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-18 05:50:06

David Abrahams wrote:

> I guess that's their problem, since AFAICT we're unable to properly
> detect all the conditions which say whether wchar_t is supported.

Though I appreciate any effort to create a new, modern and
reliable build system I strongly disagree here.

A build system that has no autoconfiguration property like
GNU-autoconf/-make/-header kicks us right back to the
middle-age where we fiddled around with imakefiles and
other design problems that hinder plug'n'play.

If I decide to have this or that flag on, I expect
no library in use to bail out, but to build smoothly.
Library::obey() && Library::disregard_then_missing_functionality().

The way compilers and compiler versions are handled
is the weakest part of the boost libarary (your OP
just mentioned another peak of iceberg).

If boost::build does not serve as a drop-in replacement
for the GNU-autotools then it is no true alternative to ever

I strongly _hope_ boost::build will detect things like wchar_t
automagically, since this is what the UNIX world taught us:
to handle the chaos between 32/64 bit, POSIX, SystemV, BSD, Linux
and the OS some detect problems with.

best regards,

Markus (still writing and

Build your own Expression Template Library with Daixtrose!

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