Subject: Re: [Boost-build] [future] Implementation language(s)..
From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-10-25 09:58:39
On Tuesday, October 18, 2016, Stefan Seefeld <stefan_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 18.10.2016 10:28, Klemens Morgenstern wrote:
> > I'd provide both C++ and Python extensions, otherwise I do agree. I'll
> > see if I can come up wiht a way to build a plugin-system that may
> > understand more than one language, but with one interface; if that
> > works providing more than one language for extensions shouldn't be a
> > problem at all.
> I'd caution against that. A build system consisting of plugins written
> in many different languages is just begging for trouble for maintenance.
After some thought for the past week.. I agree. Multiple languages at the
plugin level would make it a nightmare for users to know what they need as
far a requirements. But I think it would be OK to write Python plugins that
make use of native (i.e. C/C++) library/module. As in that case the
compilation of that ends up in the module install instead of being up to BB
to try and compile and use on the fly.
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