Subject: Re: [boost] Status of Visual Studio 2017 support
From: Andrew Pardoe (Andrew.Pardoe_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-02-16 15:03:19
[Olaf] Wouldn't it make sense to have one VS install, chosen by the user of course, be the default?
The problem is in locating that one VS install.
[Re: general discussion]
Visual Studio used to install onto a developer's machine like a dump truck of bricks being unloaded. The VS team made some design choices to help make VS install lighterweight, less impactful, and uninstallable. As a side-effect of that design, it's also able to be installed side-by-side.
That last point causes some unintended consequences. Providing an API to query for VS installs and their components suffices for many scenarios. I, at least, did not anticipate your scenario: a developer should be able to clone and build a repo without first establishing that machine's developer environment. (Not that I was the one making the decisions about VS, but we can extrapolate from my lack of anticipation.)
There are a number of things I want to change about Visual Studio. This is especially true regarding how we set up developer environments. I find the vcvars* batch files to be unintelligible. But those things aren't going to change instantly. For now, I'm focusing on enabling your scenario.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk