Re: [boost] Configure check guidelines

On 9/24/20 2:30 PM, Paul A Bristow via Boost wrote:

...

-----Original Message----- From: Boost On Behalf Of Alexander Grund via Boost Sent: 24 September 2020 11:59 To: boost@lists.boost.org Cc: Alexander Grund Subject: [boost] Configure check guidelines

...

...

On 9/24/20 11:19 AM, Alexander Grund via Boost wrote:

...

Is there some common practice where to put such configure checks that are required to build the library? I'm putting configure/build time checks in the config directory at the top level of the library. But I don't think there is an official guideline wrt. this. I think there should be. And not just in JSON metadata. But it is a big job for some libraries, duplicating what is in jamfiles.

Starting a new thread. TLDR: Where should (source)files go that are required during the "configure" step of a regular build?

Not sure what is meant by JSON metadata as I don't see how that is related. Can you elaborate?

This was Edward Diener's original suggestion that the Boost metadata currently giving name, author etc could include the C++ standard level applicable.

It is the data for this list https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/

The discussion is here, for the record and new people joining this thread

http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Proposal-for-adding-C-level-to-the-meta-l...

Configure checks that require source files typically do not check for C++ version or features. For that there are already pre-defined rules in Boost.Config. Configure checks typically test the environment for various features, such as available APIs, libraries, compiler capabilities, CPU features, that sort of stuff. I don't see how JSON metadata relates to this. To me, the existing practice (using config top level directory) seems fine. We might as well document it.