On Wed, 10 Nov 2004, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:On Wed, 10 Nov 2004, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
The main issue I see with using embryo (or small, or Java) or any other byte-code/VM based machine is that it seems to make it much more difficult for the end-user to fix problems on their end.
That would be no less true of a compiled ltmain.c.
Even with a compiled ltmain.c, I expect that the platform specific rules would be encapsulated in data files rather than being compiled into ltmain.c. That would allow end-users to adjust the rules. Ltmain would simply be a rules processor.
That could also be achieved with a byte-code ltmain.
Yes, of course.
When evaluating the direction to take for a C-based libtool, I tend to think of libtool being similar to `make' in that it is a rules processor. The process of "configuring" libtool would be a matter of selecting which collection of rules applies to the current system. I see that the "rules" are scripted somehow (could use /bin/sh as `make' does) and are easily changed, but the core libtool engine works identically on all platforms, and does not need to be based on scripting. The main argument to use a VM for internal libtool logic would be to reduce code size so the libtool footprint is smaller.
Bob ====================================== Bob Friesenhahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen
_______________________________________________ Libtool mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
