From: Dan Gohman (gohmandj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-03-22 17:37:02
On Fri, Mar 22, 2002 at 03:24:03PM -0600, Rene Rivera wrote:
> >From looking at the code, it seems that the ABI and ISA are orthagonal. So
> would it not make more sense to have two different features "sgi-abi" and
> "sgi-isa". Or is there a reason why you picked the single one instead?
I did it that way because that is how the build system of the project I'm
working on does it. You are right that it would make more sense to have
independant features. I'll do it that way in the future.
> Also choosing the ABI-ISA looks similar to the problem of cross-compilation,
> that is telling the single local compiler what "platform" to compile for.
> Would it then be preferable to better support cross-compilation instead of
> adding more platform specific features? For example we could add an
> "architecture" feature, this would map directly to your "sgi-abi-isa"
A general cross-compliation feature in Boost.Build would probably cover
my needs. I'd prefer that someone more familiar than I with the Boost.Build
system design it, however :-}.
-- Dan Gohman gohmandj_at_[hidden]
Boost-Build list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk