Re: [boost] Why Boost.Build?

Subject: Re: [boost] Why Boost.Build?
From: Felipe Magno de Almeida (felipe.m.almeida_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-03-30 05:24:29

On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 5:36 AM, Artyom <artyomtnk_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>

[snip]

>> And like Emil says in reply to this also,
>> for those of us that  use BBv2 the only painful
>> drawback is the speed. Which is solvable in many ways.
>> One of which, porting to Python, has shown the likely
>> speed improvements. To put  it another way.. Jam is an OK
>> designed scripting base for BBv2.. But bjam is a  terrible
>> implementation of that design :-)
>>
>
> By no way bjam speed is the showstopper. If the only problem
> of BBv2 was its speed I was loving it.

I do love BBv2. But in no way I think speed is its only problem.
It is far from easy to extend boost.build to use different
tools. And the documentation is specially lacking for this. But
I'm confident the python rewrite will change this, specially
since it might get more users which are very fond of python.

> Artyom

Regards,
-- 
Felipe Magno de Almeida