Re: [boost] Merged #149, "Encode architecture and address model in versioned layout names"

-----Original Message----- From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Olaf van der Spek via Boost Sent: 16 October 2017 18:33 To: boost@lists.boost.org Cc: Olaf van der Spek; Peter Dimov Subject: Re: [boost] Merged #149, "Encode architecture and address model in versioned layout names"

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:

...

Olaf van der Spek wrote:

...

...

Now that building Boost with address-model=32,64 works, I think that we

...

ought to build both for --build-type=complete on Windows. I'm less sure > about --build-type=minimal, but given that (a) what minimal builds is > determined by the configuration Visual Studio projects use by default > (which is 32 bit) and (b) that we're getting more and more calls for 64 > being built by default, it looks like --build-type=minimal ought to > build both 32 and 64 as well.

...

that we're getting more and more calls for 64 being built by default,

By default, does that mean with or without --build-type=complete specified?

Without.

So would the default build-type be changed to complete or would a new build-type be introduced for this?

Having complete be the default would be most convenient, with minimal allowing you to optimize for space.

There are many novice 'missing library version cries for help' that could be avoided by ensuring that all library versions are built by default. So +1 for complete 64 and 32 bit. The cognoscenti can and will easily use a command that cuts to their minimum. Paul --- Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal UK LA8 8AB +44 (0) 1539 561830