From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-11 08:20:27
On Monday 11 April 2005 13:48, David Abrahams wrote:
> Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > Hello,
> > currently, a Jamfile can request that another project be build with
> > build-project path-to-some-other-project ;
> > however, the same effect can be obtained with
> > alias other : path-to-some-other-project ;
> > The second syntax also allows to use project id (and not only project
> > directory, see http://zigzag.cs.msu.su:7814/scarab/issues/id/BB37).
> > What if we declare 'build-project' deprecated and eventually remove it?
> I don't know. It's really nice that alias can be used to accomplish
> so many things, but the usage above is just a little too obtuse.
Because of the need to make up an extra name? Or because the connection
between the name 'alias' and the effect might not be so obvious?
> all for reimplementing build-project in terms of alias, but maybe we
> should preserve the expressive way of "saying what you mean" at the
> interface level.
OTOH, if we use alias for that, user don't have to learn yet another new
syntax. You can write:
alias other : some_dir/<variant>release ;
alias other : some_dir : <toolset>gcc:<variant>release ;
And 'build-project' can't do anything of the above, so user have to remember
And if 'build-project' is reimplemented in terms of 'alias', then it probably
should be named just 'build', because it can build not only projects but also
-- Vladimir Prus http://vladimir_prus.blogspot.com Boost.Build V2: http://boost.org/boost-build2
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