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

From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-12-11 09:52:24

David Abrahams wrote:
> Rene Rivera <grafikrobot_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> David Abrahams wrote:
>>> Rene Rivera <grafikrobot_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>>
>> I've seen "run.cpp" many times, 
> 
> That doesn't make it descriptive.

Well it's at least descriptive to the people who use it ;-)

>>> At least Jamfile and Jamroot visibly distinguish themselves as user
>>> build descriptions as opposed to parts of the build system itself.
>> Opinions vary ;-)
> 
> You don't think they distinguish themselves from build system files?

If by build system files you mean the stuff inside 
boost-root/tools/build/v2 then, they are distinct from build system 
files. But as Phillip points out, they are not distinct from 
Perforce/Jam files. Which is particularly important since that's what 
users see.

> How would you make them more distinct?

Not use names that Perforce/Jam uses :-)

> I'm not arguing with you about the suffix, FWIW.

OK. By the way if you search the archives, once upon a time you also 
agreed about the "build.jam" name ;-)

> Uuuuughhh.  This legacy of picking up environment variables is going
> to dog us forever, isn't it?

We can choose to abandon that legacy at some point. After all we can 
just remove the import of the env into the global module in bjam.

-- 
-- 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