On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 11:44:23AM -0500, John W. Eaton wrote:
> On 28-Jun-2001, Steven G. Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> | On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Denis Barbier wrote:
> | > But there is no reason for AC_F77_WRAPPERS to require
> | > AC_F77_LIBRARY_LDFLAGS; in _AC_F77_NAME_MANGLING one may simply (well,
> | > i have no idea whether this is simple or not) link against Fortran
> | > compiler to suppress this dependency and have a safer AC_F77_WRAPPERS
> | > macro. Or did i miss something obvious?
> |
> | Well, then you have the opposite problem: figuring out whether there are
> | any special flags or libraries that you need to pass to the Fortran
> | linker in order to link to C programs. (Generally, the answer seems to be
> | no, but can we count on that always being true?)
>
> No, if you include C++ compilers in with C compilers.
>
> Since I think the AC_F77 macros are useful for linking Fortran with C
> or C++ code, I think they should continue to be used that way. If you
> try linking with the Fortran compiler when you mix C++ and Fortran, I
> think you will run into some trouble.
[...]
What I wanted to say is that it would be great if Autoconf and Automake
were consistent wrt to language mixing. I have no idea whether your
objections are right or not (and I did not remember telling anything
about C++), but please read Automake documentation about this topic, you
will understand my confusion concerning current detection scheme.
Denis
