From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-03-31 13:07:15
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rene Rivera" <grafik666_at_[hidden]>
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Rene Rivera" <grafik666_at_[hidden]>
> >To: <jamboost_at_[hidden]>
> After writing a bit more code with the ":" it's not as clear as I
> it has one drawback, which we didn't notice before, it doesn't work
> collides with $(var:D)
Uh, yeah, "minor" drawback ;-)
> , etc. I started using ";" as a subsitute. I'm leaning
> more towards the "<>" use, it does stand out:
> long ?= $(short) ;
> rule,brief,doc<$(module-name),$(name)> = $(brief) ;
> rule,short,doc<$(module-name),$(name)> = $(short) ;
> rule,long,doc<$(module-name),$(name)> = $(long) ;
Err, why the commas in the initial part of the name?
rule-long-doc<$(module-name),$(name)> would seem much more apprpriate to
> >No need for "doc," is there, since everything is strictly local to
> >doc module?
> By now they are, they didn't start out that way :-)
> >(BTW, I'm still worried about having to invoke 3 separate rules to
> >the docs for a rule or variable. Lots of times I'm lucky if I can
> >of one way to say it, much less 3. Won't we end up with a patchwork
> >brief, short, long comments?
> >Also, I hope there will be few or possibly no variables introduced by
> >the system, so we won't need user-level variable docs
> Right now long-s are optional, but I could take the Javadoc approach
> the first sentence as the brief?
That sounds plausible. Personally, I'd be happy with just one.
> >> "_". Capitalizing things seems contrary to the Jam norm,
> >??? Perforce caps all their rule names.
> Yes, but we haven't.
OK. It's contrary to the boost norm.
> >> I kind of liked the gCAPS, except for the caps. But without the
> >> it's gcaps :-(. So an initial character to identify globals would
> >> And the only one I can think that sorta fits is "*". For example:
> >Hmm, I'm probably headed off in a dangerous direction here, but what
> > .my-global = list of things ;
> > do-something $(.my-global) ;
> >That has a nice consistency with the idea of "." as scoping operator
> >use a :: prefix to reach global scope in C++).
Any comments on this?
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