Boost logo

Boost :

From: Piyo (cybermax_69_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-17 13:05:01

Bjørn Roald wrote:

> If you intent to test the bcp approach, my code is a good way to start.
> I looked it up, and I have several versions of it available. The
> latests version introduces boost::expressive as dependency to bcp to
> handle changing boost to nested namespaces like boost::1.34.0. This

Our programmers perfer this nested namespace style so I am definitely
interested in bcp if it can do it.

> code is as far as I remember not complete, so the best start would be
> the earlier version based on boost::regexp only. If this is what you
> want to try, I will send you the code.

Does this mean that the regexp based code cannot do nested namespaces?
If so, is it possible to keep the dependency on regexp and yet still
have nested namespaces or is the expressive dependency a must?

> I did a quick diff against a resent cvs version of boost, and it seems
> that there are a few changes to bcp we want to merge in. If you are
> interested and give me a few days, I will find time to merge and test
> the merged version a bit for you.

Either way, I can test it before I spam the facility :) So yes, I can
test bcp.

> If a bcp based solution becomes useful, I think it should be considered
> to be included in the tool in the boost distribution. As of now I think
> we need some more prof of the usefulness of the concept, and I think
> documentation is needed as to the best ways to use such a tool. Maybe
> some conventions can be introduced for naming and how the tool is used
> in the configuration management. Here is a simple sketch of my ideas:
> |
> ------------+--------------------------+--------------------------------
> central SCM | local CM/SCM | build environment
> ------------+--------------------------+--------------------------------
> repo <--svn--> namespace boost | --bcp-> namespace mylib_boost
> | |
> | do your boost work here | bcp used as a build step only
> As the figure illustrate, bcp is a one way tool when you change the
> namespace. I feel strongly that the tool shall be used as a build step
> rather than keeping
> the modified code under local source control. The better way is to do
> modifications,
> patches, testing and contributions for boost as other boost users. Then
> use bcp as a build-time tool.

I see your point but at least in our facility there is only a handful
of developers that are interested in contributing to boost.
The rest are users (only a handful also as I am actively
trying to evangelize users). I am leaning towards permanently changing
the namespaces to our facility for regular users and for those
interested can still download boost sources and contribute directly.

> To reduce overhead introduced by this build-time, I added an option to
> my bcp version which in case the target file exist only will overwrite
> if file content changes. This reduces build time dramatically for
> changes after initial build.
> Help is offered ;-) Anyone ready to try this can mail me off the list
> if you prefer.

BTW, if you want to take this off-line, feel free to email me directly.

I am ready to test it when you are :)


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