Re: [boost] MPC and Boost Build (was Boost and Google Summer of Code 2007)

From: Bjørn Roald (bjorn_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-06 12:14:45

Jeff Garland wrote:
> Bjørn Roald wrote:
>
> I'll just comment on the options that I think have potential.  The others 
> probably won't fly given that bjam isn't going to be dumped as the primary 
> developer interface at this stage.
>
>   
>>> 2. Something is created that can generate MPC files from Jamfiles.
>>>   
>>>       
>> This would be useful.  MPC itself does not need to be in the boost 
>> distro for this scheme to work.  All that is needed is that something 
>> can generate the .mpc files.  One natural choice would be an add-on to 
>> bbv2 since it already parses the Jamfiles.
>>     
>
> Agree that this would be handy and would go over well with fans of boost 
> build.  If you took a particular library it would somehow have to get all the 
> rules from the tools/build/v2/*.jam files for a given environment to produce 
> the needed mpc information.  The potential problem I see is that MPC embeds 
> some of this same information in it's template files...so you might have to 
> 'templatize the mpc templates' so the nitty gritty details of toolset 
> configurations can be exposed.
>   
I agree.  But I am not sure if all of this need to be addressed at the 
first shot at a tool.  I spend some time reading docs for bbv2 and mpc 
now, so soon I will have better understanding of formats and semantics. 

>>> 4. (added after reading the last section of the email)
>>>     Add Jamfile input file support to MPC.
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>> Yes, If the semantics of the information in .mpc files and Jamfiles are 
>> close, this may be feasible.  Would be fun to try it out anyway.  Think 
>> I need better understanding of the two file formats first.
>>     
>
> MPC isn't a build system, so it's a bit different.  None-the-less all the 
> details of how to configure compile options and such need to be in the MPC and 
> Jamfiles.  Both MPC and Jam put this mostly behind the scenes with a good set 
> of defaults.  So, this also might be another valid approach.
>   
I guess this can be done in two steps 

1. Translates Jamfiles to mpc files              (as OCI is now offering 
support for)
2. MPC generate workspace/project files  (as supported by in existing MPC)

This may be an ok solution. 

-- 
Bjørn Roald