Re: [Boost-users] Status of Boost.Extension from sandbox?

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Status of Boost.Extension from sandbox?
From: Klaim (mjklaim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-09-10 06:46:47

Hi,
I'm interested in this library and will use it in my project. (The other
alternative was the POCO shared library but I don't want to add POCO in that
project).

I just tried by curiosity to install it with VC10 and it seems to fail. VC9
seems to work fine. I used bjam. Here is the log:

E:/SDK/boost/extension-reflection/tools/build/v2/tools\msvc.jam:320: in
configure-really
*** argument error
* rule path.make ( native )
* called with: (  )
* missing argument native
E:/SDK/boost/extension-reflection/tools/build/v2/util\path.jam:44:see
definition of rule 'make' being called
E:/SDK/boost/extension-reflection/tools/build/v2/tools\msvc.jam:172: in
configure
E:/SDK/boost/extension-reflection/tools/build/v2/tools\msvc.jam:145: in
msvc.init
E:/SDK/boost/extension-reflection/tools/build/v2/build\toolset.jam:38: in
toolset.using
E:/SDK/boost/extension-reflection/tools/build/v2\build-system.jam:434: in
process-explicit-toolset-requests
E:/SDK/boost/extension-reflection/tools/build/v2\build-system.jam:513: in
load
E:\SDK\boost\extension-reflection\tools\build\v2/kernel\modules.jam:281: in
import
E:\SDK\boost\extension-reflection\tools\build\v2\kernel\bootstrap.jam:128:
in boost-build
E:\SDK\boost\extension-reflection\boost-build.jam:17: in module scope

I don't know if VC10 compatibility is already a requirement for Boost
libraries (I doubt it as VC10 is still in Beta) but I guess it's good for
you to know that it don't compile.

Hope that helps.

Joël.

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:25 PM, Rex Kerr <rexkerr_at_[hidden]> wrote:

>
> If you have any trouble compiling the examples or doing the tutorials, or
>> have a question about advanced usage, I am quite available to help with that
>> (that's easier than refactoring code).
>>
>
> Thanks for the offer and the feedback.
>
> I do have one other concern, and that is API stability.  If I do decide to
> go ahead with boost.extension and it is eventually accepted into boost
> proper then upgrades of boost versions means potential major refactoring of
> all components that use plugins.  Having gone through this pain in the past
> with other boost libraries it is a high level concern.  While an API change
> is expected now and then, having to rewrite too much code at once isn't
> desirable!  Any advice on how to protect against this?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Boost-users mailing list
> Boost-users_at_[hidden]
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
>