From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-04-09 19:24:29
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vladimir Prus" <ghost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 1:54 AM
Subject: Re: [jamboost] Development plan
> David Abrahams wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Rene Rivera" <grafik666_at_[hidden]>
> > > Maybe getting "exe" working with "gcc" is simple enough? Don't
> > what you
> > > guys usualy use for a compiler though.
> > That sounds good to me. I have gcc on both my windows and linux
> > Let's go for 2 different versions, though, as proof-of-concept: How
> > about 2.95.2 and at least one 3.x.x version?
> Sure, gcc is ok for me too. I only think that this is quite distance
> can suggest something in between.
Hey, the smaller the first goal, the better!
> 1. First, we write a single rule called "make" or "generate"
> rule make ( targets + : sources * : command-to-run )
> This rule would just construct dependency graph (of "virtual
> convert it into actual target and build it. This way we'll
> - have something working -- it's just nice to have
> - have chance to play with virtual targets and finilize its design
> - such rule is usefull anyway
Not sure I understand this suggestion. What is "command-to-run"?
Is this just a rule which constructs a simple dependency graph of depth
> 2. Second, we make the link between projects/abstract targets and
> targets. Abstract targets corresponding to project will have
> method, that should return virtual dependency graph. Ultimately, it
> use generators to find that graph. At this stage we'll just have a
> that, instread of running the right algorithm, will either contain
> logic, or consult some decision cache.
Please elaborate. I get a vague sense of what you're suggesting, but
it's not solid for me yet.
> At this stage we can support
> 1. Two toolsets (gcc 2.95 / gcc 3.0)
> 2. Two build variants
> 3. Two simple features (inlining and threading, for example)
> 4. One fancy feature ( stlport/stdlib )
> 3. Everything, including proper dependency graph construction for the
> selected toolsets. Some more features.
> How does that sound?
I like it in principle. Needs a little flesh on the bones.
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