Subject: Re: [Boost-build] Boost.BuildV2 Python migration, SCons?
From: Stefan Seefeld (seefeld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-08-29 09:13:41
On 08/29/2009 09:06 AM, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> On Saturday 29 August 2009 Bruce Simpson wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Interesting that Python has been proposed as an alternative to the
>> internal bjam language:
>> I found the Boost.BuildV2/bjam native language difficult to fathom. Some
>> time ago I successfully implemented it, experimentally, as a build
>> system for XORP, however, we have since moved to using SCons, which is
>> working well for us at the moment. Some of the constructs in there, I
>> borrowed from our bjam experiment.
>> I wonder if there has been any thought or discussion about possibly
>> moving to SCons (which uses Python), for building Boost itself?
> It's hard to give an accurate and useful answer to this question. "There were"
> is accurate, but probably not what you wanted to know. I think there's even
> a branch where scons is used to build Boost, but I don't know the state
> of it.
> I am personally not convinced that SCons has the same high-level features
> Boost.Build has. As for using SCons as build engine -- this is possible,
> in future, although there were some concerns about its performance.
what is the state of the Python port of boost.build ? That seems to fit
in this discussion, doesn't it ?
-- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
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