Re: [Boost-build] Son of b2 - suggestions

Subject: Re: [Boost-build] Son of b2 - suggestions
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-10-31 12:40:33

AMDG

On 10/31/2016 10:18 AM, Robert Ramey wrote:
> On 10/31/16 5:05 AM, Klemens Morgenstern wrote:
>> Imho b2 failed because the documentation is not nearly detailed enough,
>> the language is strange and building extensions is painful. Not as
>> painful as using CMake, that's why I'm doing it, but it still feels like
>> masochism. The real limit of b2 is constituted by it still using jam,
>> and all other (except for the documentation) come from that.
> 
> Oh - no problem - just enhance the documentation and problem solved.
> 
> Of course this is not going to do it.  The problem is what if one writes
> a program which requires pages and pages of arcane documentation to
> describe it, you've done something wrong and need to step back an see
> what it is.  That "something wrong" is usually that the "language" has
> no rime or reason - it's a grab bag of features each with it's own
> syntax, which are coupled together in unexpected ways.
> 

  The Jam language itself is actually extremely simple.
The complete yacc grammar is less than 200 lines
of code.  (337 lines including all whitespace,
comments, and scaffolding.)  The documentation
here is pretty complete as well:
http://www.boost.org/build/doc/html/jam/language.html

In Christ,
Steven Watanabe