Subject: Re: [Boost-build] The future of B2?
From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-09-30 00:01:03
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Edward Diener <eldiener_at_[hidden]>
> I have made this point before so I hope you will forgive me from making it
I forgive you.. On one condition.. Keep reminding us about it. As I'm old
and forgetful ;-)
> I think the main thing that is holding back better use of Boost Build is
> the fact that it is very difficult, if not impossible, for an end-user of
> Boost Build to understand how the final command line parameters are
> generated for a particular rule. In other words, given the plethora of ways
> in which options for a rule, such as 'compile' or 'link', are specified,
> whether via a toolset, a project, a rule, or the command line itself ( did
> I miss anything ? ), I think it is important for the end-user to
> understand how he can change things to add, subtract, or replace a given
> command line option for commands generated from a rule. Clearly merely
> adding some Boost Build feature to the command line does not always work as
> one suspects it should. Since the process for generating command lines for
> rules in a jam file is pretty complicated end-users of Boost Build become
> completely lost in trying to understand how to change the way Boost Build
> creates commands, and this means that Boost Build is much less "usable"
> then it could be.
Check. There is certainly a wide gap between user actions and matching
build actions that needs to get better.
-- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
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