Re: [boost] [system] Why is this not header-only?

From: Michael Caisse (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-04-06 15:08:42

Matthew Herrmann wrote:
> boost-request_at_[hidden] wrote:
>   
> Hi All,
>
> Just my 5c on this, but we are using Boost Build to manage our software 
> build process. We use a lot of separate libraries and compile a lot of 
> code, even for a large compiler farm. Using Boost Build, it is trivial 
> to create and use libraries, including 3rd party libraries, that 
> separately compile. I don't find it at all inconvenient to use static 
> libraries because that build system is designed to work _with_ the 
> object file model that C++ sits on, not around it.
>
>   

I've lingered on this thread for some time and can't hold it in any 
longer. I can't agree more with Matthew. I was so impressed with the 
Boost Build concepts that I have converted both our win32 and linux 
builds for all of our products to use Boost Build.

In fact, we aren't even using any of the Boost libraries in our 
production code yet. We were introduced to Boost Build when evaluating 
Boost and it resolved several build issues more cleanly than our 
in-house solution.

It appears that we are an oddity in the community, but Boost Build and 
bjam was not a show stopper.

Best Regards -

Michael

-- 
----------------------------------
Michael Caisse
Object Modeling Designs
www.objectmodelingdesigns.com