From: David Abrahams (gclbb-jamboost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-06-09 09:19:33
Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> We probably ought to transition to an explicit specification of
>> subdirectory on imports pretty soon anyway.
> That's up to you. I've moved some stuff to "tools" but left
> "util"/"core" separation to you and Ali.
OK. The big question that comes along is, when I write:
import foo/bar ;
do the rules show up qualified, e.g.:
foo.bar.baz a1 : a2 ;
or unqualified as they do now:
bar.baz a1 : a2 ;
My inclination is to allow syntaxes for both results, and to do the
latter by default, if only to limit the scope of changes to source.
import foo/bar ; # bring in rules as bar.baz, etc.
import foo.bar ; # bring in rules as foo.bar.baz, etc.
> But anyway: we've got to allow plain imports without directory in
> 'project-root.jam' so adding binding of including module to search
> paths will still be needed.
> But 'normalize-raw-path' won't be needed in that case.
-- 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