Subject: Re: [Boost-build] naive usage of bootstrap.sh
From: Vladimir Prus (vladimir.prus_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-10-24 11:03:24
On 24-Oct-16 5:27 PM, Robert Ramey wrote:
> On 10/23/16 3:15 PM, Vladimir Prus wrote:
>> I think it behaves as documented. The prefix option specified where to
>> install, not where to build, so the build happens in the root folder.
>> You can pass --build-dir to b2 to change that.
> Hmmm - read that as where to install b2. I was surprised when b2 showed
> up in boost directory rather than the directory pointed to by the
> -prefix=<dest directory>. I see now that prefix refers to the
> destination of the boost install rather than the destination of the b2
> I read --build-dir as the directory to be used to for temporary files to
> be used in the build not the destination of the b2 executable.
> I really, really admire the developers of boost build and the effort
> they have put in trying to make this work. But I think there is really
> something missing here. It seems that there is interest in making the
> "next" version. I would like to see:
> a) small prototype
> b) with it's own manual
> c) subjected to test by naive but not dumb volunteers
If you volunteer, I'll count you in.
> d) who try to use the product by following the instructions in the manual.
> e) and record their experience as they go
> f) so the developers can make something that is easy to use.
> h) as a means to keep product design on the right track.
> Of course I think many, many programmers efforts could benefit from this
> type of prototyping. But I realize that many development teams feel
> that they don't have enough time to do this. Of course I think they're
> wrong - but that's only my opinion.
I think you're effectively suggesting doing usability testing for non-UI
things, which is a good idea, but I don't know if anybody
has ever successfully recruited volunteers to do this.
-- Vladimir Prus https://vladimirprus.com