From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-10 15:06:54
on Thu May 10 2007, "Ames, Andreas (Andreas)" <ames-AT-avaya.com> wrote:
> boost-bounces_at_[hidden] wrote:
>> on Wed May 09 2007, "Gennadiy Rozental"
>> <gennadiy.rozental-AT-thomson.com> wrote:
>> > 3. Do we (boost developers) really have any problems with BBv2?
>> Yes, I do. I started that project, so I have a vested interest in it.
>> Still, I'm just about ready to stop sinking any more time into it.
>> Just off the top of my head:
>> - the build process part of bjam is inscrutable even to experts
>> - the language in which it is written is used in no other tool or
>> project, thus presenting a barrier-to-entry for volunteers.
> I'd expect that at least these two objections also apply to CMake.
Quite the opposite. CMake doesn't "do" build proceess: it delegates
to lower-level tools like make or your IDE, and AFAIK, it's written in
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com Don't Miss BoostCon 2007! ==> http://www.boostcon.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk