From: Markus Schöpflin (markus.schoepflin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-11 03:28:22
David Abrahams wrote:
> Markus Schöpflin <markus.schoepflin_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>But after trying the documented approach, I think the second reason is
>>that with the patch the usage is easier and more concise. Compare
>>What do you think?
> I'm not convinced you can really get away without setting
> PYTHON_VERSION in either case. It's used to identify the Python
You are right of course. The omission of PYTHON_VERSION is a
cut-and-paste error in the second example.
But anyway, what I meant was that in the first case I'm specifying
redundant information in PYTHON_INCLUDES (PYTHON_ROOT, PYTHON_EXEC_ROOT,
and PYTHON_VERSION) and in the second case I'm not. And I would think it
more natural to specify ROOT and EXEC_ROOT but to figure out which
include path I have to use.
Of course these are only my personal preferences. Maybe it really is not
such an improvement as I'm thinking it is.
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