Re: [boost] Boost building with CMake

From: Dean Michael Berris (dmberris_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-18 16:35:01

On 5/18/07, Anthony Williams <anthony_w.geo_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> "Dean Michael Berris" <dmberris_at_[hidden]> writes:
>

[snipped my biased example]

>
> That's overly verbose: most of these rules are built in to make.
>
> My simple makefile says:
>
> main: main.cpp some_other_file.cpp
>

Okay... I might be rusty with Make, but shouldn't that be:

main: main.o some_other_file.o

?

Nonetheless...

> > Jamfile:
> >
> > exe main : main.cpp some_other_file.cpp ;
> >
> > Like I said, apples and oranges. ;-)
>
> ;-)
>
> Simple projects are easy with make, and easy with Boost Build. From what I've
> seen, complex projects are complex with both, too.
>

After all that's said and done, I would tend to agree with this statement. :-D

I guess it just depends on your level of expertise and chosen approach
to accomplishing a task with a given tool you're familiar with. Of
course, people familiar with Make and adept at it will prefer that
over a "wannabe replacement" like Boost.Build + Boost.Jam where they'd
have to learn a new syntax. Or maybe not, depends on how they approach
the problem and how they see Boost.Build + Boost.Jam. :-)

Some people like inline skates, others like old-skool skates. Apples
and Oranges -- both fruit, but different flavors. ;-)

-- 
Dean Michael C. Berris
http://cplusplus-soup.blogspot.com/
mikhailberis AT gmail DOT com
[phone]