Re: [boost] [gil] Ok to merge new gil's extension to release branch?

Subject: Re: [boost] [gil] Ok to merge new gil's extension to release branch?
From: Christian Henning (chhenning_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-03-31 14:01:48

>
>
> FWIW iostreams uses zlib so that may be a place to start.
>

I have read the tried to understand their way of including zlib. I
think they make it themselves a little too easy and not so easy for a
potential user. For instance a user who wants to compile four
different sets of libraries ( you know the usual: x86, x64, debug,
release config ) would have to redefine the ZLIB_BINARY for each
configuration. And how can a user set compiler symbols that are
relevant for zlib?

What I like to achieve with gil::io is that 3rd party libs are
compiled before the test cases. Here are a few points that I like to
have:

* have the user set compiler symbols that are relevant for 3rd party libs
* have the user set basic library information depending on current
architecture configuration, like DEBUG x64, etc.
* some users might want to compile zlib and other libs as c++ code.
Inside gil::io users can set some compiler symbols so the 3rd party
header are included appropriately.

I hope the boost community can help me out setting up my jam files accordingly!

Regards,
Christian