Subject: Re: [boost] 32/64 library name conflict under Windows?
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-03-08 11:54:25
Glen Fernandes wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 11:18 PM, Rene Rivera <grafikrobot_at_[hidden]>
> > 2. People responding with "+N".. Which of the following would you
> > prefer?
> > And give rationale for your preference, and optionally give rationales
> > for not preferring others:
> > A) Having file names with "32" *and* "64" on them?
> I prefer option A. It's consistent, doesn't require separate directories.
> The architecture is key of the build variant just like the type of CRT
> used, and whether it is a static or dynamic library, and I don't have any
> good reasons for why it should be special cased.
I also prefer option A, for the same reasons. Any argument against encoding
the architecture into the name also applies to the other things that we
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk