From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-09-18 15:03:39
On Monday 18 September 2006 18:06, David Abrahams wrote:
> David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > It is certainly sufficient for glibc and libstdc++, but not for
> > portable building on the "abstract machine." However, unless James
> > M. has some strong arguments to the contrary, I'm willing to go with
> > the optimization as we currently have it.
> Hm, well, good points in private email, James.
> Why don't we just make the optimization on platforms where it's known
> to work? Now that you've implemented it, Volodya,
> will work for those who want to disable threading explicitly.
Where would you put it? That syntax can be only used to cancel parent's
requirements, not to cancel usage requirements from any target.
-- 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