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

From: Zbynek Winkler (zw-bjam_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-12-17 04:40:57

David Abrahams wrote:

>>I think if extra paths will cause problems only for 
>>debugging, it's not a big deal.
>> 
>>
>
>It's not just about debugging, it's about user experience. The
>extra-long and complicated command-lines currently generated by BB don't
>leave people with warm fuzzies. 
>
I agree.

I am not in favor of changing the usage-requirements to propagate all 
the way. Regarding the previous example of libraries A, B and C that 
have the following chain of dependencies

lib A ;
lib B : A ;
lib C : B ;

I do not think that this setup says that C uses A. If library B includes 
some headers of library A in its public interface then it is the 
responsibility of library B to say that the usage requirements of A 
should be propagated further (lib B : A : : <use>A ;). I think it is 
better to be explicit in this case because it is more predictable and 
does not cause unnecessary bloat of the final command line.

Zbynek

-- 
http://zw.matfyz.cz/ http://robotika.cz/
Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic