[boost] Re: Re: [wave] tool/lib

From: Gennadiy Rozental (gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-22 13:35:46

"Jonathan Wakely" <cow_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
news:20050322174452.GA96438_at_compsoc.man.ac.uk...
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 12:18:10PM -0500, Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
>
>> 2. Wave at the moment does require conformant compiler while end ser may
>> want to use it with different one
>
> Why should you have to compile Wave with the non-conformant compiler in
> order to use wave with it?
>
> Download GCC, build Wave, delete GCC, then use Wave to replace your
> non-conformant compiler's preprocessor.
>
> This isn't ideal, but it's not impossible and allows Wave to be used on
> any platform that GCC runs on.
>
> What am I missing?  Why should it be a requirement that Wave be
> compilable with all broken compilers that might want a better CPP ?

It shouldn't. And it was exactly my point.

<side>
Also I do not see why I need to compile it in a first place. If I follow the 
logic that all open source tools need to be delivered in a form of source 
code, then above procedure will include downloading gcc sources and building 
gcc. All this lead to some ... well inconvenience.
</sidenote>

Wave is in a different domain. It's primary user do not bother about 
portability, code clarity, design pattern. That's why we also need  to treat 
it differently.

Gennadiy