From: Alex Besogonov (cyberax_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-27 11:28:30
Vladimir Prus wrote:
>> Maybe we can setup a Wiki to draft the requirements for the BBv3?
> I'm a bit nervous about "BBv3". You see, what we have now is not ideal, but
> it's working codebase. I seriously doubt that there are architectural changes
> that can't be done on the existing code (or its Python port), and given large
> number of tests, after the changes Boost.Build will continue to be usable.
I'm not saying that we should rewrite BBv2 _completely_ :)
> So I think the best course of action in the mid-time would be:
> - Finish C++ Boost transition to V2
> - Port V2 to Python
BTW, I have a wild idea: rewrite JAM in C++ (after all, BBv2 is mostly
used on platforms able to compile Boost). Jam's codebase is about 500Kb
of code, it can be reduced to about 200Kb (or even less) of C++ code.
Then we can hook Python into BBv2 using Boost.Python.
> - Gradually change architecture to any new requirements
Is it possible? PCH+PDB support alone require bi-directional property
propagation. And, AFAIK, more advanced flag support is necessary. For
flags msvc.compile PDB_CFLAG <debug-symbols>on/<debug-store>database :
/Fd ; # not used yet
What can I do if I need not just "/Fd" but
-- With respect, Alex Besogonov (cyberax_at_[hidden])
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