Re: [boost] Proposal for moving Boost to CMake

Subject: Re: [boost] Proposal for moving Boost to CMake
From: John Maddock (jz.maddock_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-19 06:58:43

On 19/06/2017 00:41, Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Richard Hodges <hodges.r_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> This is a sorry state of affairs for the worlds most popular c++ library.
>> It should be easy, no, automatic to include boost. After all, c++ without
>> boost is like [insert idiom about useless things here].
>>
> I've mentioned this some number of times in the past decade or more.. Using
> Boost should be as easy as dropping the source code into your project (and
> hence use your build system) and build as needed for your project.  And
> I've asserted that libraries that don't document how to do that should
> consider having a bug.

+1, the vast majority of libraries (that need building) are "just bunch 
of source files".  I routinely build them outside of bjam (or anything 
else for that matter) because it's easier to include them in Visual 
Studio solutions that way - at least for me.

Back to lurking now.... John.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com