From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-03-12 07:27:42
David Abrahams wrote:
> Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > I like this syntax (it's better than <supress>true proprty in V1). The
> > only reservation is that it's not that nice for stages
> >
> > intermediate stage dist : a b c ;
> >
> > How stage can be intermediate? Probably "explicit" is better?
>
> Yeah, probably.
OK.
> >> then I think the first rule might make a lot more sense.
> >
> > That would just reduce the number of directly requested targets, and
> > therefore, the number of situations where Rule 1 and Rule 2 cause
> > different behaviour. I'm still at loss.
>
> I like rule 1 if we have "explicit". However, I also think we should
> look at the reasonable cases where 1 and 2 would cause different
> behavior. If they're not significant, I think you should do
> whatever's easiest.
I think the second example in my email which started this thread pretty much
captures the primary possibility: library which is both directly requested
and is dependency of other main target (with different properties). I must
admit that I never put "define=MACRO" in bjam command line, so is not the
best judge.
- Volodya