Re: [Boost-build] [Bb]uild.jam?

From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-12-10 23:59:47

David Abrahams wrote:
> Rene Rivera <grafikrobot_at_[hidden]> writes:
> 
>> David Abrahams wrote:
>>> The boost-build.jam at BOOST_ROOT sets
>>>
>>>     JAMFILE = [Bb]uild.jam [Jj]amfile.v2 ;
>>>
>>> As far as I can tell, the first pattern is not used for anything and
>>> can be deleted.  Any objections?
>> I use it at:
>>
>> http://boost.cvs.sourceforge.net/boost/website/feed/build.jam
>> http://boost.cvs.sourceforge.net/boost/website/feed/downloads/build.jam
>> http://boost.cvs.sourceforge.net/boost/website/feed/news/build.jam
>>
>> But since that's not on the regular root it doesn't matter.
> 
> I don't know what that means really, but OK.

Since the http://boost.cvs.sourceforge.net/boost/website is a root 
separate from the http://boost.cvs.sourceforge.net/boost/boost root it 
is not affected by changes to 
http://boost.cvs.sourceforge.net/boost/boost/Jamroot.

>> I do have a preferential objection. I prefer the more lucid "build.jam" 
>> name than any of the others. 
> 
> Lucid?

[Merriam-Webster] 3 : clear to the understanding : INTELLIGIBLE

>> And as I've mentioned before having an 
>> extension on the file names is considerably more convenient on people as 
>> it lets them integrate with the OS facilities.
> 
> I understand that argument, but it's hard to see build.jam as a
> particularly lucid name.  That's like naming a C++ source file
> run.cpp.

I've seen "run.cpp" many times, specifically as a common name when the 
file defines "main()". I've also seen main.cpp for same purpose.

> At least Jamfile and Jamroot visibly distinguish themselves as user
> build descriptions as opposed to parts of the build system itself.

Opinions vary ;-)

> Also, I note that we don't have a .jam-suffixed name for Jamroot.

We do in project.jam:

JAMROOT ?= project-root.jam [Jj]amroot [Jj]amroot.jam ;

>>> Secondly, is there any reason we can't change the pattern to 
>>>
>>>     JAMFILE = [Jj]amfile(.v2)? ;
>>>
>>> ??
>>>
>>> That would allow us to start writing Jamfiles called "Jamfile," which
>>> matches the name used in the BB documentation.
>> You could just not set JAMFILE and use the built in value set in 
>> project.jam.
> 
> Sounds good to me... although I see project.jam looking in the global
> module (presumably to get JAMFILE out of the environment) first, which
> seems like a mistake.

I believe it's so that one can set it in the boost-build.jam file as 
that file loads into the global module. Hence why the line you want to 
change in that file works :-)

-- 
-- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com
-- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com
-- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim - grafikrobot/yahoo