Re: [jamboost] Re: propagation of usage-requirements

From: Toon Knapen (toon.knapen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-12-16 15:08:28

Vladimir Prus wrote:

> 
> I think it's a conflict between "explicit" and "convenient". No matter what 
> guidelines are there ("explicit is better than implicit", for example), I 
> often find that decision is not easy. In this case, Toon did not like too 
> explicit behaviour. 

AFAICT it's not about 'implicit' or 'explicit'. Generally I'm also for 
'explicit'.

But suppose library C uses library B which on its turn uses library A. I 
don't think the developer of library C (and thus which uses library B) 
should know that library B relies on library A. It's the developer of 
library B that states in his jamfile that B is dependent on A. C only 
uses B. Even more: Suppose library C is not changed but all of a sudden 
library B decides to add some dependency to libZ. This should certainly 
not induce a change to the build-specification (==Jamfile) of library C, 
only to the build-specification of library B.

toon