From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-18 10:17:19
Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> writes:
> David Abrahams wrote:
> > What about just, "execute all actions which have foo/bar/baz.cpp as an
> > immediate source"?
> Hmm.... then, why "--compile" in command line?!
Because it fits the most-general sense of the term "compile", and I
can't think of a better name to use?
It's not very compatible with the idea that there might be a way to
creat .i (preprocessed) files, though.
> >> bjam --action=*.compile%foo/bar/baz.cpp
> > Hmm, it's kind of ugly. Let's make this a low priority until we think
> > of a nice way to express it, OK?
> I'm not happy about this syntax either, but the functionality is
> something I'd like to get in 2.0. Let's revisit it later.
-- David Abrahams dave_at_[hidden] * http://www.boost-consulting.com Building C/C++ Extensions for Python: Dec 9-11, Austin, TX http://www.enthought.com/training/building_extensions.html
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