From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-06-13 02:38:48
> > >Hi,
> > >it was quiet here for a while, but now I think it's better to continue
> > > with
> > >development.
> > I also think it's time to get back to this :-)
> Me too. I'll try to devote as much attention as possible; I'm a bit swamped
> right now, though.
I'm hoping that once we'll be able to compile a simple program under gcc,
someone interested in Boost.Build might want to contribute.
> > >and wondering what to do about "--toolset" and "--build". Would we like
> > both
> > >options to be present, or to retain only latter, so that the user could
> > >simply type
> > >
> > > bjam --build="gcc borland release debug"
> > >
> > >What do you think?
> I think lots of different interfaces have been discussed. Someone asked at
> one point why he could just type "bjam gcc" and have it build with gcc.
> Maybe --build="..." and --toolset="..." are just distractions; Maybe we can
> distinguish all of these things from target names, so users could write:
> bjam gcc borland release debug my_target your_target <inlining>off
> Then "my_target" would actually be a way to spell the "my_target" value of
> the implicit feature <target>.
Oh... that would only require that target names do not clash with toolset and
build variants. Okay with me.
But... Can we handle command line arguments? Won't they be unconditionally
treated as target names by jam?
So, is the following okay?
1. If command line mentions any toolset, we using the build request from
command line verbatim, otherwise we add a "default" set of toolsets.
2. default-build is used when command line either specifies no build request,
or specifies only toolsets.
default-build cannot specify toolsets (it seems unreasonable)
it is augmented with either the default set of toolsets or the toolsets given
in the command line.
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