Boost logo

Boost :

From: Doug Gregor (dgregor_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-09 17:39:43

On May 9, 2007, at 4:33 PM, Rene Rivera wrote:
> Yes, but end-users are not the only audience we have to account for.
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but what you are saying is that: It is worth
> making Boost developers' life harder in order to make a particular
> subset of end-users life easier.

I didn't think I was making any trade-off. I want a build system
that's easier for end users, especially first-time users. I don't see
anything that makes it harder for developers.

> Note: I happen to be one of the end-users of Boost.Build, so I avoid
> using IDEs, in particular VisualStudio, because they are some of the
> best examples of bad interface design (and I have yet to find an IDE
> that did not reduce programmer productivity).

Then don't use an IDE. CMake can generate the makefiles for you.
Worse case, you need a top-level makefile to run multiple commands in
one shot.

> Which brings up the point, or maybe it was already mentioned,
> that any new technologies we consider, we have to consider the within
> Boost expertise available to maintain the new system.

Yes, definitely. The same consideration applies to Boost.Build
version 2... how much expertise is there to maintain this system? As
far as I know, only 2 people have any level of understanding of BBv2.
I, personally, struggle to do anything that isn't copy-paste from
something I've done earlier. Is there anyone outside of Boost that
understands BBv2 at any level?

        - Doug

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at