Re: [Boost-build] [PING] State of PCH/msvc

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
I agree.

>   - 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 
example:
==========
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 
'/Fd"c:/some_dir/some_file.pdb"' ?

-- 
With respect,
             Alex Besogonov (cyberax_at_[hidden])