Subject: Re: [boost] Proposal for moving Boost to CMake
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-18 00:17:22
On 06/17/2017 10:45 AM, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 7:37 AM, Steven Watanabe via Boost
> <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Boost.Build implementation:
> We have the sources to bjam why can't we just turn this into a one-line rule?
> For example, this says that test.cpp should compile:
> compile test.cpp
> Can we just have
> compile-header test.hpp
> And have bjam add the bits to define a main() and include test.hpp for us?
It's certainly possible if there's enough demand.
The main issue for generalization is the test
target name. It needs to
a) be human readable and writable,
b) not be excessively long, and
c) not cause collisions (headers with the same
name in different directories are normal)