Re: [Boost-build] Building a generator binary then using it?

Subject: Re: [Boost-build] Building a generator binary then using it?
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-10-15 12:34:04

AMDG

Alexander Sack wrote:
>> I don't think that's enough, as we may (for instance) always want
>> to use the release version of a generated tool.
>>     
>
> You can specify the PATH then as a constant.
>   

Maybe.  In one case, I've wanted to use
the release build but with the same toolset that I
use to compile my main code.

>> It would be nice if this could somehow be integrated
>> with toolset.flags
>>
>> toolset.flags tblgen COMMAND : tblgen ;
>>     
>
> Yes!
>   

Ok.  Let's consider how likely this is to causes ambiguities.

a) A target reference like project//target is unlikely to be intended
as something else.

b) If the flags are in a non-Jamfile module, then strings like tblgen
cannot refer to a target.

c) In a Jamfile module, I hope that it would be fairly rare to
give a target the same name as an option.

d) If this behavior is wrong, it could be a pain to work around.

> Just on a side note, I'm a little unhappy with the generator/extension
> mechanism.  Dare I said it but its WAY too complicated to use for
> simple tasks

Yeah.  for simple tasks it's usually easiest to use the make rule.
The point of generators is that they can automatically be chained
together given the source types and the target type.  In other words
generators are designed for writing tools that just work once the
initial effort for defining them is done.

>  (and highly undocumented to boot, yes the basics is there
> but what you actually do and how it works is still somewhat mysterious
> at times).  That's my 2 cents..
>   

Agreed.  The documentation needs a thorough overhaul.
http://www.boost.org/doc/tools/build/doc/html/bbv2/reference/generators.html
does say "The information is this section is likely to be outdated and 
misleading."

In Christ,
Steven Watanabe