It wasn't my intention make you reply that, I just do a statement trying to wide the view about the problem. As I wrote I completely agree about the whole decision and specially your last paragraphs as below. Maybe my poor English have been confusing about my message.
Please don't waste time on this problem, we need you focused on more important problems. []'s Maniero Exactly. Such feature would require total integration > of build tool and compiler (hbmk2 and harbour). > Meaning harbour compiler will in essence be dropped > and all work would be done in hbmk2, which in turn > gets much more intimate information from source > parser (compiler) than now, most importantly embedded > references of package names, and compiler would have > to deal with .hbc parsing and automatic inclusion of > referenced #include files, etc. It's essentially an > "#package "mypkg[.hbc]" feature. Plus some sort of > .hbc repository has to be solved. Looks like a lot > of work to me and a lot of potential discussion along > the way. It would also require that user understand > and accept the .hbc concept, since it will be something > similar to the one we have already. > > BTW, if someone really wants to use the half-baked > solution, we have #pragma BEGINDUMP/ENDDUMP since > many years, which makes everyone free to use any > sort of weird and C compiler dependent code embedded > in .prg, including '#pragma lib', and whatever else > that seems to be useful. I don't recommend it, but > it works regardless. > > Viktor > >
_______________________________________________ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
