Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Why Boost.Build?
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-03-29 20:46:48


AMDG

On 03/29/2011 05:04 PM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
>
> Part of that is because the design tries to do too much.
> Specifically, the production of multiple build configurations with a
> single build command offers most users no benefit in exchange for the
> enormous complication it causes in design, implementation, and
> especially in writing build instructions (Jamfiles in our case).

Whatever you're talking about here, it's outside of
my experience. I have never written a Jamfile that
was made significantly more complex by the fact that
multiple configurations can be built at once.

> For
> the few who do benefit from the feature, the ability to build multiple
> configurations easily could have been written as another layer that
> invokes the build system multiple times.
>

I disagree. Being able to build multiple
variants of libraries is pretty much a must-have
on Windows, given that debug and release are
not necessarily ABI compatible. I guess it
doesn't matter much to me /how/ it's handled,
but it can't be treated as an afterthought
that doesn't really matter.

In Christ,
Steven Watanabe


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk