From: Darren Cook (darren_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-14 18:01:47
> I use scons for my projects, which include usage of boost. I have not used
> scons to build boost itself...
Same here. I tried bjam and found it very hard to understand. Scons was
appealing as I knew enough python to get it to do whatever I needed.
I only use on one platform (linux), whereas Boost has a need for
multiple compiler support, so I have no idea how it is for that.
My biggest complaint with scons is that it decides the compile order: I
wanted unit tests to be compiled and run in the order I defined them
(i.e. from quick and simple to slow and complex). But if 20 exes need
recompiling due to a header file change, it grabs all 20 names, and then
compiles them in arbitrary order (probably alphabetical order).
So to work around that I have python loops adding artificial
dependencies, so that each unit test exe depends on the previous unit
test exe. The downside of that is I have bypassed all scons cleverness:
if I change a file only the first and last unit test depend on, it still
has to compile and re-run all unit tests in between.
So, for my needs, I give make and bjam 3/10, and scons 5/10.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk