On 17 Jul 2000, Akim Demaille wrote: > | Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > | > | AC_DEFINE_UNQUOTED($zz, 1, test) > | Yes, but this is *_UNQUOTED. If it can't possibly accept a third > | argument, why is it documented as doing so? And it *did* work in 2.13. > > I meant the AC_DEFINE family. he's saying AC_DEFINE_UNQUOTED. > It cannot have ever *properly* worked. Pay attention that you're > referring to the creation of config.h.in. > > Maybe AC_DEFINE(`echo FOO`) used to be understood by autoheader, but > it was a misfeature. In the general case, this cannot be done, hence > it must never work :) I missed this thread: what is your counter-example? -- T.E.Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dickey.his.com ftp://dickey.his.com
- Re: AC_DEFINE-descriptions with 2.14* Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_DEFINE-descriptions with 2.14* Johan Danielsson
- Re: AC_DEFINE-descriptions with 2.14* Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_DEFINE-descriptions with 2.14* Johan Danielsson
- Re: AC_DEFINE-descriptions with 2.14* Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_DEFINE-descriptions with 2.1... Thomas E. Dickey
- Re: AC_DEFINE-descriptions with 2.1... Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_DEFINE-descriptions with 2.1... Johan Danielsson
- Re: AC_DEFINE-descriptions with 2.1... Thomas E. Dickey
- Re: AC_DEFINE-descriptions with 2.1... Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_DEFINE-descriptions with 2.14* Thomas E. Dickey
- Re: AC_DEFINE-descriptions with 2.14* Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_DEFINE-descriptions with 2.1... Thomas E. Dickey
- Re: AC_DEFINE-descriptions with 2.1... Thomas Dickey
- Re: AC_DEFINE-descriptions with 2.1... Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_DEFINE-descriptions with 2.1... Peter Eisentraut
- Re: AC_DEFINE-descriptions with 2.1... Akim Demaille
- Re: AC_DEFINE-descriptions with 2.14* Alexandre Oliva
- Re: AC_DEFINE-descriptions with 2.14* Akim Demaille