Re: [boost] Proposal for moving Boost to CMake

On Mon, 2017-06-19 at 07:58 +0100, John Maddock via Boost wrote:

On 19/06/2017 00:41, Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:

...

On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Richard Hodges wrote:

...

This is a sorry state of affairs for the worlds most popular c++ library. It should be easy, no, automatic to include boost. After all, c++ without boost is like [insert idiom about useless things here].

I've mentioned this some number of times in the past decade or more.. Using Boost should be as easy as dropping the source code into your project (and hence use your build system) and build as needed for your project.  And I've asserted that libraries that don't document how to do that should consider having a bug.

+1, the vast majority of libraries (that need building) are "just bunch  of source files".  I routinely build them outside of bjam (or anything  else for that matter) because it's easier to include them in Visual  Studio solutions that way - at least for me.

I don't think globbing source files is the problem. The problem is linking in the dependencies and possible compiler flags.