From: Pedro Ferreira (pedro.ferreira_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-12-14 06:15:51
Em 14 Dec 2004, às 08:06, Vladimir Prus escreveu:
> On Monday 13 December 2004 21:12, Steven Knight wrote:
>>> The integration with SCons can be done:
>>> - at the SCons.Environment level, calling builder methods to create
>>> virtual targets
>>> - at the lower level Node ADT interface
>>> I really don't like SCons Enviroments because they are too cluttered
>>> with functions, are too unwieldy, load all tools by default, etc.
>>> So I prefer the second approach: it provides all the functionality
>>> provides (and more) and fits very well with BB's architecture.
>> The issue I see is that Environments are pretty integral to the SCons
>> ability to build Nodes. My guess is that you'll need something that
>> at least resembles an Environment closely enough to interact with key
>> engine subsystems.
>> That said, I agree with you that SCons Environments have become too
>> heavyweight. To that extent, we will be cleaning up how Environments
>> handle Tools at some point in the (relatively near) future, after 0.97
>> is out.
> I think that there's a close correlation between Environment in SCons
> property-set. Environment holds values of "construction variables".
> property-set holds values of features. At a later stage, V2 converts
> of features into values of variables which are used in build action.
> It looks
> like converting property-set to Environment is reasonable approach.
Yes, but the problem is that depends on the tool (gcc, msvc, qt,
whatever) you are using.
Please see my reply to Dave's e-mail.
> OTOH, I can't comment if Environment is better for us that plain Python
> map ;-)
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