From: David Abrahams (gclbb-jamboost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-09-12 08:46:35
Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> writes:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> > Hmm... IIRC, it was discussed between Ali, myself, and *you* some time
>> > ago. In short, it was decided that @ does not add anything.
>> Yes, but now some crazy "//" notation which I don't understand has
>> shown up. Where did that come from and why do we have it?
> Well, the motivation is explained by Ali at the very end of
> Some followups are in
> "//" is the separator between project-id and target-id.
Oh. We never discussed using that notation, which may explain my
confusion. Well, it's minimal and complete, but:
1. I am concerned that on some systems // is used to write remote
2. People read paths left-to-right. I thought it was helpful to
have an @ at the beginning to say "this is a project path".
3. It seems to me that using "//" for the usual case is syntactic
overkill. Should it be reserved for the case where you are
specifying a multi-component path w.r.t. a project, i.e.
> In fact, I almost regret that I agreed to change target-id syntax
> based on subjective judgements. Apparently, what was confusing for
> Ali was ok for you, and now you're confused about target-ids.
In fairness, we never discussed the // notation; I'm not sure it was
OK for Ali.
-- 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