Subject: Re: [Boost-build] gcc: options specific to C compilation
From: Ilya Sokolov (ilyasokol_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-11-10 02:41:37
Vladimir Prus wrote:
> On Monday 10 November 2008 10:06:24 Ilya Sokolov wrote:
>> Vladimir Prus wrote:
>>> On Sunday 09 November 2008 01:39:40 Jeroen van der Wulp wrote:
>>>> Hello Everyone,
>>>> I would like to add -std=c99 as a requirement to the project with C as
>>>> well as C++ code. So I added it using the <cflag> feature, which breaks
>>>> compilation of C++ code.
>>>> I have noticed that in the manual it says that cflags contains options
>>>> for both C and C++ compilation. I have also noticed that a feature
>>>> called <compileflags> is being used in the msvc.jam. It seems to be a
>>>> set of options that is common to C and C++ compilation. This feature is
>>>> currently not usable for the gcc toolset which to me is rather confusing.
>>> It does not really work for msvc, either.
>>> Anybody will object if I make 'cflags' apply for C compilations only, on
>>> all toolsets, and make 'compileflags' apply for both C and C++ compilations?
>> I think we should drop *flags parameters, add compileflags feature and
>> use toolset.add-requirements rule.
> You mean, that options to 'using rule' should be routed via toolset.add-requirements?
> Right now, many options are not features -- like 'archiver', or 'linker-type'. Do you
> suggest to convert them to features, too?
No, we should differentiate between the options of the toolset and the
options that will be applied to targets being built with that toolset.
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