Re: [boost] Cmake

Subject: Re: [boost] Cmake
From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-24 16:17:04

On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Stefan Seefeld via Boost <
boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:

>
> So what's the reason you prefer (at least in that context) building
> boost as an integral part of another project, rather than referring to
> it as an external (pre-installed) dependency ?
>

Depends on the project... But generally because I need precise control over
the compilation variant and want it to be uniform over all the external
dependencies. That precise control offers the advantage of isolated and
predictable building for the project regardless of who builds it (other
devs and CI). In other projects it's the only option available as creating
installed libraries is not an option. Specifically when I'm using
emscripten for C++ web development. And since I use b2 in my projects I
have the luxury of referencing the build descriptions in Boost directly.
And hence I can understand the desires of people with other build systems
to do similarly. But at the same time I've also done non-intrusive building
of many different external libraries (i.e. using b2 to build autotools,
make, cmake, etc projects [1]) so I know it's somewhat presumptuous to
expect library authors to cater to every pet build system out there. And
instead prefer authors to document, in prose, how to build their libraries.

[1] I've also done that type of building in other build systems. Mostly
proprietary ones I can't talk about here though.

-- 
-- Rene Rivera
-- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net
-- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail