Boost logo

Boost :

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 bloß wie ein Opiat reizend, betäubend,
Schmerzen aus Schwäche stillend.*" - Novalis 1798

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