On May 14, 2005, at 23:17, John W. Eaton wrote: [..."#define foo foo"...]
Can you point to a widely used compiler that will actually have trouble with this? If not, then maybe it is not worth worrying about?
Hmm... does anyone feel like setting up an array of test machines to automatically do frequent builds and tests of snapshots and report errors as they come up?
I've done something like this a couple of times (for binutils, while I was maintaining it at Cygnus, and more recently for Kerberos at MIT), but it's always involved machines I had privileges on; something more distributed that lots of us could contribute cycles to without having to grant each other login access or anything like that would be better for Guile, but a bit harder to design and implement, at least if you're security-conscious. (And in fact some trouble we've had recently with Kerberos has been to do with platforms *not* represented in our local test setup.)
With something like this in place, we could simply implement schemes like this, and get feedback relatively quickly on how it's handled on lots of platforms that any contributors care about, rather than waiting and hoping somebody has tested platforms X, Y, and Z before the release goes out.
_______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user
