Subject: Re: [Boost-build] The future of B2?
From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-10-03 19:39:41
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 6:41 AM, PJB <darthpjb_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> As a long term user of boost and C++ developer in industry - I feel like I
> should offer my two cents.
Thank you.. It's the community feedback that makes this worthwhile work :-)
And it makes those two cents invaluable!
Most corporate application development does not occur under Unix/Linux -
> even when developing for Mac or Linux, most software houses using C++ use
> Visual-Studio to write code then make appropriate changes to run under a
> 'Nix system.
> This is relevant - as the perspective of how a tool "should" work to a low
> level developer is dramatically different - Espeically given most
> Visual Basic.
> The 'Nix developer coming to windows is often confused about how to "use
> the toolchain", I've often heard such lines as "Windows developers seem to
> Jerry rig something", in the Inverse scenario of a Windows developer moving
> to 'Nix, the *very idea *of a makefile is alien, surely you just need to
> "press build". Using command-line invocation directly to the windows user
> appears to be backward.
> This is unfortunately very great in impact when it comes to boost-build.
> As a developer versed in windows and unix development for many years,
> using the command line to compile was second nature to me - and while I had
> difficulty finding the correct options to simply use b2 to compile boost
> itself, doing so took me only a few hours.
> As a developer working with other windows-based C++ developers, I've often
> found myself having to explain the principals of how to complete such a
> simple operation repeatedly (to the point of distributing our own in-house
Yep.. Been there, done that.. Is all I can say to that.
On 28 September 2016 at 09:19, Dominique Devienne <ddevienne_at_[hidden]>
>> It's not clear to me whether Rene's and your point is about using b2
>> *within* the IDE,
>> or using b2 to generate a b2-independent IDE-specific project/config. Or
>> a mix, like CMake.
> âThis comment (without any insult intended) is a clear example of this
> The windows developer expects to open Visual Studio, click "Create new
> Boost-Build project"â, then click "Build", or "Run With Debugging" and said
> project "just-work", third party tools like Marmalade, Xanmarin, and others
> provide this functionality *out of the box*.
> There is no need to write a make-file, or comprehend where in
> visual-studio the toolchain settings are.
> âPlease do not misunderstand, I do not wish to undermine any of the great
> work in Boost-Build, or the developers working therein, however the modern
> Windows programming environment has a â*de facto* standard that boost
> does not meet, indeed, is very far from meeting currently.
> Indeed, it is this reason why my company does not use boost-build, rather
> opting for writing our own makefiles instead (mostly due to the
> unfamiliarity of our developers with makefiles and command line compiling).
> I wish I could propose some mechanism though which this issue could be
> solved - however doing so is beyond my comprehension of Boost-Build's
> internal mechanics, what I can enforce however is a the simple requirement
> of working with Visual-Studio as naturally as possible.
I have ideas for the mechanism involved.. And I'm actually impressed that
some new ones where suggested in this thread. Not something I was expecting
this soon. But as you can read from my replies I want to solve it
desperately for the simple reason that I'm selfish. I just don't want to
waste more time dealing with the shortcomings of the existing build systems
(even the varied ones of msbuild). And to do that I need to be able to
convince those IDE users that they can work with something 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