Re: Scons vs BBv2

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-16 07:10:57

"Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve" <rwgk_at_[hidden]> writes:

> --- David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> I don't want my build system to encourage that kind of
>> flying-by-the-seat-of-one's-pants.
>> Reliability and speed need to go together.
>
> Debugging is a dirty business anyway. How it is done has no
> long-term impact. 

Unless the approach leads to covering up problems or otherwise missing
information.

Well, in truth I have sometimes done the same thing when I just
repeatedly wanted to try to get a single file to compile.

> Since I routinely work with many platforms any sophistication of the
> debugging tools is usually in the way. Most of the time valgrind and
> print statements are my best friends.
>
>> Of course, I'm willing to sacrifice scons' md5 checks and
>> just use timestamps, so what does that tell you?
>
> Variety is the spice of life?
>
> I was just giving some reasons why I found it more enticing to work with scons
> rather than bjam in response to a request for feedback...

...and I appreciate it very much. I was just discussing your feedback
;-)

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com