From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-21 06:27:10
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 03:42:53 -0500, David Abrahams wrote
> "Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > No I mean straight up changes to files.
> I don't know what you mean by that.
What I was trying to say was I changed a header file that is unaffected by a
macro and obviously included...see below, however...
> If it's header files you were changing, then discovering that they
> are relevant to the build depends on Boost.Build's ability to detect
> that they are #included (possibly indirectly) in something that is
> named in a Jamfile. That could be thwarted by #include
> SOME_MACRO(...), of which we have many examples in Boost.
Now that I slept on it, that's probably what happened. Awhile back we did add
some changes that conditionally include entire files based on a macro. But
it's of the form
which didn't immediately match the pattern above in my brain ;-)
> If you were changing source files listed directly in a Jamfile and
> there was no recompilation, or the headers were #included directly,
> then we have a deeper problem.
No, haven't seen that....
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk