Subject: Re: [Boost-build] Custom generator problem
From: Johan Nilsson (r.johan.nilsson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-26 05:25:54
Vladimir Prus wrote:
> On Thursday 26 November 2009 11:45:21 Johan Nilsson wrote:
>> Vladimir Prus wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 25 November 2009 16:48:22 Johan Nilsson wrote:
>> - It is a bit confusing at times when "sources" are "targets". Would
>> it be possible to have a more neutral name?
> It surely would be possible -- except I don't know what better naming
> to use.
> SCons uses 'node' -- is that better? Or 'input' and 'output' targets?
Node is hardly better - perhaps even worse. As far the latter, I have a hard
time wrapping my head around "input targets". What about "artifact"?
I'm sure someone could come up with a better name, naming is big in e.g. the
boost developer's list.
>> - Do you have any other comments on the generator code itself? I'd
>> be happy for suggestions for improvements.
> I do not have any knowledge of how NUnit works, but as far as
> Boost.Build is concerned, I did not find anything wrong there. You
> might want to use the
> options module instead of this:
> local p = [ MATCH --nunit-path=(.*) : [ modules.peek : ARGV ] ] ;
> as this will allow you to put
> option nunit-path : whatever ;
> in any config file. This is a pure convenience matter -- what you have
> is fine.
Thanks, I'll look into that.
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