Re: [boost] [cmake] Minimum viable cmakeification for Boost

On 6/21/2017 11:23 AM, Robert Ramey via Boost wrote:

On 6/21/17 6:47 AM, Chris Glover via Boost wrote:

...

On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 at 04:01 Thomas Heller via Boost wrote:

...

Interesting that you bring this up ... If you are so much in favor of a declarative build system, we already have multiple. For example plain old make or Boost.Build. With that being said, wouldn't it be more viable to improve Boost.Build with: - Better Documentation - More examples

Boost build has been hampered by a number of design decisions which have never been revisited.

a) It is "too smart". It tries to infer the toolset by looking around the file system. If one has more than one compiler set there is really know way to know which one is going to pick. So then one is forced to go into the workings of boost build to figure out how to over ride this behavior.

The solution, of course, is always to pass toolset=xxx to the b2 command line. In my own use of b2 I always do this. snipped...

Robert Ramey