[C++-sig] Re: Just about to release
Joel de Guzman
djowel at gmx.co.uk
Thu Oct 10 04:22:07 CEST 2002
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Abrahams" <dave at boost-consulting.com>
> Greg Hawkins <greg.hawkins at blueyonder.co.uk> writes:
> > BTW, a slight worry I have with the tutorial is the emphasis on
> > (b)jam. I don't have any problems with bjam but I don't use it for
> > building v2 extensions and it would be nice to reassure users that
> > (apart from typing 'bjam' to build boost itself) they don't need to
> > fool around with an alien build tool to build an extension. All they
> > need is
> > 1) the python headers in their include path
> > 2) to link with python
> > 3) $BOOST_ROOT in their include path
> > 4) link with BOOST_ROOT/libs/python/build/bin-stage/<boost python>
> > 5) define BOOST_PYTHON_DYNAMIC_LIB and BOOST_PYTHON_V2 (are these
> > still necessary by the way?
> > I haven't fooled around with my build settings for a while)
> > (at least I think that's all you need; a quick glance through my scons
> > scripts doesn't turn up anything else...)
> Well you see, there's the rub. The formula given there is absolutely
> reliable for all the supported bjam toolsets. Do you have a 100%
> reliable alternative for them? What if they don't know how to make a
> shared library? What about getting the other compiler options they
> need in order to make their C++ compiler fully-conforming enough to
> compile Boost code (don't laugh, for lots of compilers you have to
> turn on ansi conformant features).
> > There's no need to patronise people but forcing jam on them on page
> > 2 of the tutorial may be offputting...
> All build systems are messy, AFAICT. Both Boost.Build and Scons are
> working hard to change that, but in the meantime I think it's the
> case. People need to use bjam anyway just to build
> (lib)boost_python.[so/dll]. I think it makes sense to give people a
> reliable formula for getting started. I don't know why you see this as
> "forcing jam on people".
I come from an IDE world. I've just began using the command line again
after more than a decade. I must admit, I had lots of difficulties dealing
with the details before I was able to run my first Boost.Python module.
On one hand, this is the first thing a user will have to face. On the other
hand, the details are quite overwhelming. (at least for me when I started).
I wished for something that I can play with straight out of the box;
something that I can setup in 5 minutes flat. I looked at other options
and I found bjam to be the quickest and most general.
> However, I agree with you that outlining the 5 elements you list above
> would be extremely useful.
Yes, these would be extremely useful, however, IMO, this info should
be placed in the more detailed building.html. 2c opinion.
> > Oh, and seeing that it's almost out of the door now: congratulations
> > Dave (and Joel, Ralf, and everyone else) on Boost.Python v2. Its a
> > marvellous thing.
More information about the Cplusplus-sig