[boost] Re: name mangling scheme for tru64cxx65

From: Markus Schöpflin (markus.schoepflin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-25 14:40:39

Richard Hadsell wrote:

> Markus Schöpflin wrote:
> 
>> What would you consider an easy way? Manually editing the toolset 
>> description would be out of the question I think, even if it's 
>> documented. 
> 
> 
> "Easy" would be one or two sentences; what to change in what file(s) 
> would be o.k.  I would expect to find the explanation and instructions 
> in tools/build/v1/tru64cxx-tools.html.
> 
> In fact, having looked at this short page, it brings up another 
> possibility.  Changing the name mangling is like using a different 
> compiler, or a different version of the compiler with a change in its 
> ABI.  How about a different toolset?  You are welcome to change 
> tru64cxx65 to use -model ansi, and create a new tru64cxx65arm for -model 
> arm.  This would highlight the problem for new users.
> 
> It would also make it easier for Boost developers to diagnose problems, 
> because both options would be recognized, rather than leaving one 
> unsupported.  Even if tests fail for tru64cxx65arm, the failures would 
> be understood.

To speak in terms of boost.build, this could be done as a build feature. 
We could add a new build feature called "name-mangling" with the values 
"arm" and "ansi". This would give you the opportunity to use bjam 
-sBUILD="debug <name-mangling>ansi" or -sBUILD="debug 
<name-manling>arm". As a default I would suggest to use ansi then.

What do you think?

Markus