Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [cmake] Minimum viable cmakeification for Boost
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-21 12:23:59

> The thing is that we already have a declarative build system
> (Boost.Build). People want to interface with CMake though (which is only
> very slowly catching up with the declarative stuff), and I assume that
> most CMake scripts out in the wild are *not* in the declarative
> paradigm, and it takes to get accustomed to it. Yet, there are a lot of
> people complaining that Boost is "asocial" because it doesn't interface
> well with the predominant build plan generator out there. Since CMake is
> moving more and more towards being declarative, the gap seems to close
> and we could build a bridge. Or just advertise Boost.Build more
> prominently so it isn't seen as the odd one in the block, but the goto
> solution.

I still like the automated Jamfile.v2 to cmake generator idea. Like the
svn to git transition was done, except you never actually retire the old
system. The generated cmake is for packaging and end users only.


ned Productions Limited Consulting

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at