|
Boost-Build : |
From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-10-23 14:46:58
I think I have the final question about PCH interface. Now if we write:
cpp-pch pch : pch.hpp : ......... ;
exe hello : hello.cpp pch : ....... ;
the user is required to make sure that properties used to compile pch and the
exe are "compatible". I wonder if we can improve that. One approach is to
propagate all features, including free one, from exe to pch. So that if you
write:
cpp-pch pch : pch.hpp ;
exe hello : hello.cpp pch : <define>FOO ;
the <define>FOO is propagated to 'pch'. That's "implementable", but then what
about:
cpp-pch pch : pch.hpp ;
exe hello : hello.cpp pch : <define>FOO ;
exe hello2 : hello.cpp pch : <define>BAR ;
In this case, Boost.Build won't know with what properties to build 'pch' and
will error out. And FOO/BAR really might affect just the executables, and not
the PCH. So, I think that requiring user to set right properties on PCH might
be a good idea, after all.
Comments?
- Volodya
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