Boost logo

Boost-Build :

From: Jurko Gospodnetić (jurko.gospodnetic_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-01-07 12:30:13

   Hi Johan.

> The names Jamfile.jam and Jamroot.jam are far too repetitive for my taste.

   I do not really see anything wrong with Jamfile.jam and Jamroot.jam.
As far as repetition goes - not that big a deal with something you name
only once and never refer again by name. Except of course here in these
'endless' discussions. *GDR* :-)))

> Thinking out loud:
> - The dual nature of Jamroot makes it a bit hard to name; perhaps
> root-project.jam would be an alternative to project-root.jam/root.jam?
> - Also, what about using project.jam instead of build.jam, as each
> file-formerly-known-as-Jamfile "is-a" project but does not necessarily
> define build targets?

   How about:

Jamfile = project.jam
Jamroot = project-root.jam

   The names seem ok as:
     * They get grouped together when listing files in a directory.
     * They get grouped together when listing files by extension.
     * Consistent extension helps for recognizing the files
automatically by various tools.

   Although I do not see any real difference between this and
Jamfile.jam /Jamroot.jam. :-)) Except perhaps that names project.jam and
project-root.jam do not have to be supported with capitalized initial
letter as they have no such historical usage. :-)))

> Even though this is "only" about names, I believe it would be worthwhile
> pondering on appropriate names to avoid further renaming in the future.

   I agree. I can see undocumented names and/or inconsistently used
names in examples/docs/tests as being one of the problems with adapting
boost build. You go searching for a build tool - see such 'childish'
inconsistencies and decide to not use that project until it 'matures'...

   Best regards,
     Jurko Gospodnetić

Boost-Build list run by bdawes at, david.abrahams at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at