From: Mike (mike.dev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-08-22 09:06:49
Copying my response here as I accidentally sent my original response only to Hans directly:
> I agree with you, but boost_check_library.py has to work on all the machines which run the Boost Test matrix,
Does it? Isn't that just a waste of time? IIRC, the script doesn't run unit tests or anything. It just checks
for the presence and content of various files and directories. I don't know, why this has to run
on every test machine.
> I am mainly asking because I would like to replace optparse with argparse, which first appeared in Python2.7.
My opinion: Go ahead.
If this causes trouble on a test machine, that is imho a reason to either fix
the test machine or to not run the script on that machine (just as unit-tests
for c++14 libs are not/should not be run on machines without a c++14 compiler).
It should not hold back development. But I guess Rene or maybe Michael are the
ones who could give a more authoritative answer on that.
> Von: "Paul A Bristow via Boost" <boost_at_[hidden]>
> It's even easier than I thought - I idly open a dosbox and typed Python and lo this came up.
What's a dosbox? I guess you didn't mean https://www.dosbox.com/ ? ;)
Sorry, couldn't resist - I.e. I hope, no one is developing boost on a Windows 98/ME system anymore.
But I don't have any preference on how those checks are done. Python tends to be suited way
better for text processing than c++, but if the code is already there, then I agree - hwy reinvent the wheel.
Anyway, if the problems don't get fixed, it doesn't matter what tool is used to detect them.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk