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.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk