From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-06 17:19:44
on Sat Oct 06 2007, Vladimir Prus <ghost-AT-cs.msu.su> wrote:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> I understand. Well, I doubt if anything said here would convince
>> Volodya to discard the bjam codebase and adopt something like Doug's
>> 8000-line replacement,
> This is funny argument -- it sounds like we're replacing
> something big and complex with 8000 lines of code. But let
> me point that Boost.Build download is 1.5M and CMake is some
I don't see why it makes any difference as long as other people with
plenty of support resources are responsible for those 2.5M. We give
away responsibility for maintaining 1.5M and take responsibility for
8000 lines of actual code written by Doug, most of which is comments.
> Let me also point out the core code implementing high-level
> features that distinguish Boost.Build (in the 'build' directory),
> is 9129 lines of code.
You don't count all the configuration code in the tools directory?
> So, that "8000" is nice-looking number, and it has no practical
What's wrong with my analysis above? It seems like a very practical
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
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