On Aug 9, 2000, Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here is my first proposal.
It's very close to what we need. I just don't like the name. What's
wrong with AC_NO_EXECUTABLES?
How about introducing per-language AC_LINK_IFELSE in autoconf, so that
AC_NO_CXX_EXECUTABLES could be as simple as:
define([AC_LINK_IFELSE(C++)],)?
Previously, you'd said you didn't like having a macro changing the
meaning of another macro. Then, how about defining macros such as
AC_PROG_CC_NO_LINK and AC_PROG_CXX_NO_LINK, that would be used
*instead* of AC_PROG_CC and AC_PROG_CXX?
They could behave just like AC_GCC_GROSS_HACK, except that they'd call
AC_PROG_CC after their defines.
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me
