Re: [boost] Why Boost.Build?

Subject: Re: [boost] Why Boost.Build?
From: Vladimir Prus (vladimir_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-03-27 05:10:34

Artyom wrote:

>> > These questions are asked purely out of curiosity due to my  ignorance of
>> > Boost.Jam/Boost.Build, not because I have an axe to  grind.
>>
>> In my opinion, I would like to see efforts to make boost build
>> generate CMake scripts and/or visa versa.
>>
> 
> I hope someday BB would be replaced with CMake, but as everything
> else it requires time and effort (=money) so BBv2 still lives.

Quite a lof ot effort went into CMake experiements, including:

- Writing a pile of CMake code to do what Boost.Build does now,
similar in #lines to Boost.Build.
- Employing folks (supposedly for real $) to work on ryppl.
- Supposedly paying money to Kitware for some CMake improvements.

And, it's still not there yet (after over 2 years).

Frankly, if somebody wants to have an ideal build system for Boost,
and for C++ projects in general, it would be better to invest
a similar amount of person-hours and dollars into Boost.Build -- and
have the result ready already. 

- Volodya

-- 
Vladimir Prus
Mentor Graphics
[phone]