On 5/4/07, Robert Ramey <ramey@rrsd.com> wrote:
Eric Niebler wrote:
Stefan Seefeld wrote:
So, in the spirit of 'lessons learned', I'd like to invite readers to imagine how life would be if the boost development would use existing (i.e. external) tools, if possible. (Example: docbook, rst, etc., instead of qbk; make instead of bjam, etc.)
If I had nothing but free time, I'd investigate using CMake instead of, or in addition to, Boost.Build. From the website:
For what its worth - and just to keep the pot boiling - I use VC IDE for building and testing the serialization library. I only use boost build for generating the table of results for all the compilers.
I did have to setup a very large VC solution with a project for each test and variations for archives, etc which was a huge pain. But it is very convenient now that I have it setup.
Also, FWIW. All my projects are using bbv2. But since I use VC IDE, I have a solution just to group projects and files (but no building). I believe that bbv2 is a much more secure building system. Being bitten sometimes with different macros and compiler options, now I only use bbv2. Besides, bbv2 allows much more flexibility for self-configuration of the project building, which is only possible because bbv2 is built in jam itself. We can have as low-level or high-level as we need. If only there were more documentation.
Robert Ramey
Sorry for the noise, Best regards, -- Felipe Magno de Almeida