Re: [jamboost] Re: Boost.Jam release?

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-13 00:20:37

David Abrahams wrote:
> Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > There's one question: I would be interested to know if the problem that
> > Dave reported in email called "dependency analysis bug" is cleared or
> > not. But I don't think it's show-stopper.
>
> IIRC, you diagnosed my report as a non-bug (the #include of the
> dependent file was masked by PP directives). Then you found other
> problems, which I suppose you could check yourself(?)

I've originally diagnosed the problem as non-bug, that's true. However, later 
I've found out a long dependency chain from is_class_test.cpp to is_class.hpp 
via Boost.Test, which means that both is_class_test.cpp and Boost.Test should 
be recompiled when you change is_class.hpp is touched. That happens to me, 
however, I'm not sure if this happens to you. 

IIRC, the symptoms of the original problems were somewhat different for me: 
you had no recompiles at all, while I had only some files recompiled. That's 
why there's a chance the bug still exists for you.

- Volodya