At Sun, 6 Feb 2011 16:36:54 -0500, Beman Dawes wrote:
There is something deeply flawed about the modularization design if it requires a switch to CMake.
Modularization doesn't *require* a switch to CMake at all. There's no reason the modularized boost couldn't be used with Boost.Build, provided someone was willing to make the (relatively minor) Jamfile changes that would be necessary. I think there's one other element, the generation of forwarding headers into a common boost/ directory (to keep compiler command-line length under control) that would require a fairly trivial amount of additional Boost.Build programming. But nobody has volunteered to do the work so far.
Indeed, one of the reasons I want to try the modularization design on one of my libraries is to verify it is compatible with both our current build system and build systems that have nothing to do with either Boost.Build/bjam or CMake.
There's nothing fancy going on with the directory structure of a modularized Boost, and absolutely no reason it should cause a problem for any reasonable build system. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com