Subject: Re: [boost] [ot] choosing a build system
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-05-12 08:41:03
on Sat May 12 2012, Daniel James <dnljms-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12 May 2012 04:56, Dave Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> on Thu May 10 2012, Beren Minor <beren.minor+boost-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
>>> With CMake and others, as comparison, you are only able to build one
>>> variant at a time, and by default everything will be build in
>>> conflicting way between build variants (build once in release mode and
>>> once in debug mode, and you'll overwrite the previous build output).
>> Meh; you just use different build directories. Â This is another one of
>> those advantages of Boost.Build that cost more than they deliver, IMO.
> I think you're underestimating this advantage, manually managing build
> directories could easily become a major chore. Especially during the
> transition to C++11, as different compilers and libraries have widely
> varying capabilities.
I don't advocate managing them manually if you have to do this commonly.
In fact, it's extremely easy to write a multi-build wrapper script. You
can even write it in CMake if you want it to seem like you aren't using
a mishmosh of tools. I'm sure we'll do something like that for Boost.
My point is that putting that capability near the bottom layer of the
build tool leads to nightmares, in my experience.
-- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk