Subject: Re: [boost] Switch to CMake -- Analysis
From: degski (degski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-07-22 08:29:56
On 22 July 2017 at 10:17, Daniela Engert via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
> Yet another dependency - yay!
Thisisi a rather big word, isn't it? Just dump the exe in a folder included
in the path and forget about it.
> With every suggestion on how to get around
> deficiencies of CMake when it comes to actually build (and test)
> something things are getting more complicated.
It's a deficiency of nmake jom is fixing, not of CMake.
> From my pov as a (almost
> daily) tester of both individual Boost libraries and all of Boost in
> different configurations, and as a Boost distro maintainer, this sounds
> like a growing nightmare when I compare it to the simplicity and
> ease-of-use of Boost.Build in those scenarios that I have to deal with.
Don't dis-agree with you there. Steven questioned the parallel capabilities
of nmake, and apparently it's a real concern as somebody/some peops decided
(and put the effort into it) they would offer an open source free utility
to provide the parallelisation required.
-- "*Ihre sogenannte Religion wirkt bloÃ wie ein Opiat reizend, betÃ¤ubend, Schmerzen aus SchwÃ¤che stillend.*" - Novalis 1798
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk