Re: [jamboost] Re: bjam --v2 isn't working for me

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-03-02 10:16:07

David Abrahams wrote:

> > This means you have to rebuilt bjam again :-(
> > I haven't yet decided if bumping version on all such changes is a
> > worthwhile, since "native rules" are for optimization and we're likely to
> > add quite a lot of them. If we bump version each time we'll get something
> > like 3.1.50 in no time ;-)
>
> So what? What's the point of having a version number if we don't use
> it?

It's bumped for V2 releases, if there are changes that V2 depends upon. Do you 
have to bump version number after adding every single native rule?

- Volodya