From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-03-07 08:43:44
Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> writes:
> The first target will be build with default value <rtti>on. What about the
> 1. Should we request it with <rtti>on and get an error, or
> 2. Should we request if without any <rtti> setting and allow it to be
> built with <rtti>off
> I think (1) is way safer. But interested in other opinions.
I agree with you that it's safer. I was going to say that the only
other potentially viable option is:
3. The <rtti>off is propagated back towards the first target by the
second, much like a use-requirement.
However, as I consider it, I think there's a real use-case for "I
know what I'm doing; I want <rtti>on on the first target, and I just
won't do anything evil with the library which causes me to need
<rtti>on with it."
In general cases like that should warn, with the ability to disable
the warning somehow.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
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