From: Andrey Melnikov (melnikov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-20 09:53:03
Alexey Pakhunov wrote:
> Andrey Melnikov wrote:
>>- Does vcvars32 offer us any advantages over setting the INCLUDE, LIB
>>and PATH manually even for Studio itself?
> In the one hand it works now. BBv2 already supports 4 (even 5) versions
> of msvc and will support more. It is not a good idea to re-implement all
> of them.
> In the other hand msplatformsdk currently supports only one version.
> Sure it will support future releases but it will be relatively easy to
> add required changes (if any).
>>- Do we really need to set the evironment? Would adding -I $(STDHDRS)
>>option be better? Just like we do for Borland toolset?
> It is more flexible from BBv2 point of view. The main problem is to
> re-implement and test new implementation. It is too much effort for nothing.
Firstly, by asking these question I was going to determine the strategic
goals of BBv2. Most of them ae irrelevant to your current effort of
implementing support for 64-bit compilers and external platform SDK. I
want this patch to be complete ASAP and contatin the minimal possible
set of changes. You don't need to rewrite the existing functionality if
it works. The goals for this patch are just to add new features and not
to make strategic mistakes.
In the future I'll try to specify the scope of my questions clearly to
reduce the confusion.
Secondly, the effort isn't for nothing. vcvars32.bat was one of the
reasons why MSVC toolset depends on the broken NT shell which limits
command line length. And eliminating it gets us closer to getting rid of
the ugly need to execute cmd.exe.
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