From: Ilya Sokolov (fal_delivery_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-08-22 08:49:03
Jurko Gospodnetiæ wrote:
> I believe these two pages describe two slightly different things that
> seem like something that should behave the same but appear to be out of
> The first one (http://tinyurl.com/63rjal) describes the parameters
> passed to 'using' rule calls which get handled locally by toolset
> initialization. This is implemented the the tools/common.jam module in
> the common.handle-options() rule which converts those values to the
> OPTIONS parameter passed to specific actions (assuming those actions are
> called <toolset>.compile.c & <toolset>.compile.c++).
It should be possible now to use toolset.add-requirements rule instead
of passing parameters to the toolset.using.
> On the other hand, the second page (http://tinyurl.com/6zeyhu) speaks
> of Boost Build features bearing the same name which get processed by
> each toolset separately. E.g. tools/gcc.jam toolset converts them to the
> USER_OPTIONS parameter passed to specific options (gcc.compile for
> <cflags> and gcc.compile.c++ for <cxxflags>).
> Perhaps these two should be in sync, and I believe this would be quite
> easy to change but I think someone else is needed to approve of this as
> the change seems like something that may cause quite large compatibility
I believe we should add the compileflags feature and deprecate all
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