From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-06-14 05:59:43
From: "David Abrahams" <david.abrahams_at_[hidden]>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Abrahams" <david.abrahams_at_[hidden]>
> > > Oh... that would only require that target names do not clash with
> > and
> > > build variants
> > ...or that there's a way of disambiguating...
> namely, explicit specification of the property name for implicit features
> which conflict with target names: <toolset>borland
Putting gristed names in the command-line really sucks. I can't count the
number of times I've written
and unintentionally created a file called "cxxflags"
I mean, really: shouldn't we be using something like
bjam gcc stlport-4.5.3 --inlining=off ...
In which case for the non-implicit features we should be internally
translating --feature=value into <feature>value. My only real question is
whether we need an additional level of namespacing for feature settings.
Something like --with-, e.g.
bjam gcc --with-inlining=off
Just to keep them out of the way of "global" command-line options.
If it weren't for existing code I'd suggest dropping grist right now and
using feature=value internally ;-)
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