From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-03-07 10:22:22
David Abrahams wrote:
> Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > The first target will be build with default value <rtti>on. What about
> > the second:
> > 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."
I'm sorry, I don't understand you. What is "won't do anything evil" and
what's "need <rtti>on with it"?
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