Re: [boost] Need feature branch for compile in-place static linking

From: brass goowy (brass_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-04-29 18:55:03

Ulrich Eckhardt writes:
>Why bother?
>------------
>The very simple reason is simplicity.
>* Even on a system where I don't have admin access, I can easily download and 
>compile against Boost, without having to first compile shared/static libs or 
>having to modify paths in order for the runtime linker to find DLLs.
>
>* Even if I had admin access, I would still be reluctant to installing Boost's 
>trunk.
>
>* When I'm testing different compiler settings trying to get another few 
>percent of performance, I don't have to compile another Boost version for 
>each compiler setting.
>

I think you have to rebuild the compile_inplace.cpp file each time you want to
test a different compiler setting.  I don't  find an advantage to what you 
advocate here.

>* I don't have to know which library to link to, which lowers entry barriers 
>for new Boost users.
>
>* I can easily compile and distribute programs without having to worry about 
>required shared libraries.
>

That would be helpful.  The Ebenezer approach already has that.


Brian Wood 
Ebenezer Enterprises
www.webEbenezer.net

"Many a time have they afflicted me from my youth, may Israel now say: Many a 
time have they afflicted me from my youth: yet they have not prevailed against me."   
Psalm 129: 1,2