Subject: Re: [boost] [ot] choosing a build system
From: Matthew Chambers (matt.chambers42_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-05-15 13:36:06
On 5/14/2012 2:36 AM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
> Right. And 90% of use-cases don't want to take care of any of those
> things. That's why we wrote the rules as we did. Generating all the
> possible variants of a library is a packager's job, not part of the
> regular development workflow nor something that users regularly want.
If multiple library variants are desired to be supported, then it shouldn't just be part of the
regular development workflow, it should be part of continuous integration. Boost.Build makes it much
easier for me to create various build configurations targeting the different variants without
cluttering the build files.
For an application that only cares about building one way, the extra abstraction isn't so useful, I
agree. For libraries, it's very useful.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk