Re: [Boost-build] exelinkflags/dlllinkflags feature

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-07-01 08:09:02

On Tuesday 01 July 2008 10:35:49 Ilya Sokolov wrote:
> David Deakins wrote:
> > When running the Boost regression tests on Windows Mobile, it is 
> > necessary to explicitly specify the entry point for the test executables 
> > to get them to link properly.  However, this entry point can only go in 
> > the linkflags for executables; DLLs should use their standard entry 
> > point.  I did not see any existing method for specifying 
> > 'executable-only' linkflags, so I am proposing to add two new features 
> > to builtin.jam: exelinkflags and dlllinkflags.  As you would expect, 
> > exelinkflags are additional settings passed to the linker for only EXE 
> > targets and dlllinkflags are settings passed to the linker for only DLL 
> > targets.  Attached are patches showing the relatively minor proposed 
> > additions.  Let me know if there is any opposition to this; otherwise I 
> > will go ahead and check it in.
> 
>  From http://zigzag.cs.msu.su/boost.build/ticket/98:
> 
> \quote
> It should be possible to use type of main target inside conditonal 
> requirements, like:
> <main-target-type>PYTHON_EXTENSION:<library>/whatever
> We already have <main-target-type>, but it's added *after* conditional 
> requirements are processed.
> \end

I think we can switch to adding this feature much earlier. There's issue 
with type inheritance. If you have a check for LIB type, and the actual
type is SHARED_LIB, should condition involving LIB work? I think so,
which means we get to add <main-target-base-type> feature for the specific
type of target, and for the base types as well.

Maybe, we can simplify the spelling, though:

        - Add <type> features for the type and all bases thereof
        - Add <specific-type> for the exact type of the target

This naming assumes that most of the type, we want derived types to
work as-if base types -- which might be true or false, I don't actually
know.

> I think you should not add any feature just because you need it.

Yes, I have some concern about adding feature that bundle type of
target and type of tool, and allow to pass an option to that tool.
Sounds fairly nongeneric.

- Volodya