>>>>> "Pavel" == Pavel Roskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Pavel> Hello, Akim!
Hi!
Pavel> Maybe some checks will be useless for some small packages, but
Pavel> having some basic tests bundled together increases the
Pavel> probability that they are used properly and in the right order.
Absolutely. And gives a better learning curve.
Pavel> In this particular case you may want to wait for my patch for
Pavel> AC_PROG_CPP (it's coming soon). My patch checks every
Pavel> preprocessor that it can distinguish between missing and
Pavel> existing includes. Even if CPP if specified, the sanity check
Pavel> is still performed.
Pavel> Broken preprocessors that always fail or never produce warnings
Pavel> are rejected.
Maybe your patch is simplified if you consider AC_PROG_CC has already
been run?
Pavel> But still AC_PROG_CPP should not be ignored - if it becomes
Pavel> part of AC_PROG_CC, then AC_PROG_CC should be used.
Good call! That's what I'd do, thanks!
Akim
