Re: [boost] Boost CMake support - Request for Comment

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost CMake support - Request for Comment
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-10-16 16:41:17

On 10/16/2018 10:22 AM, Alexander Grund via Boost wrote:
> 
>> Programmers are notorious for estimating the work to do any 
>> programming as about an order of magnitude less than it really takes <g>.
> True ;) So essence: Very low effort to port this to CMake due to 
> existing bjam code

That is great !

>> What is the difference in CMake terms ? In Boost Build I am fairly 
>> sure the checks are done on demand, and usually involves some sort of 
>> compile/build/run/test-result cycle which would make pre-testing all 
>> checks in a library, and holding the result for further inquiry, 
>> pretty expensive.
> On demand: User calls a function and uses the result (see example)
> Eager: All checks executed on including the CMake file. (Note: Results 
> are cached, hence this overhead is only once for all libraries for the 
> mono-build), yes high overhead for a single lib, but this is what CMake 
> also does to e.g. get compiler type, version, OS, ... and usage is 
> easier (no additional calls, see examples)

Thanks for the explanation.