Re: [boost] Encoding address-model in library names

Andrey Semashev wrote:

I think, breaking the world twice (first by adding address-model to the names, then by adding architecture) is worse than breaking it once (by adding both).

Fair point, although I think that "breaking the world" is a slight exaggeration.

There's little difference from the implementation point (I think)...

Not quite true because <address-model> is already supported by the relevant Boost.Build rule, which is why the patch is so trivial, while the architecture isn't. But I'll see what I can do.