> "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Akim> The patch below gives this on the very CVS Automake package:
Akim> * m4/depend.m4 (AM_DEPENDENCIES): Don't leave `AC_PROG_CC' etc. in
Akim> clear.
Akim> * m4/init.m4: Likewise.
Akim> * m4/sanity.m4: s/conftestfile/conftest.f
> "Tim" == Tim Van Holder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Tim> However, Emacs Lisp also has 'defadvice' which allows you to
Tim> attach arbitrary code to an existing function in different
Tim> ways. I must admit that whole advice thing strikes me as a little
Tim> insane; it's probably quite power
> Morten> Emacs Lisp comes to mind.. ;-)
>
> Not exactly: AFAIK, you can't freely hook whatever function: you hook
> on existing hooks. Right?
Yes the 'hook' concept in Emacs Lisp requires a function to explicitly
run those hooks, i.e. hooks are only available if the person writing
a routine ma
> "Morten" == Morten Eriksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Morten> Akim,
>> In fact, I am still against generic hooks because that's a bad
>> thing to do. Nobody where ever imagine doing this in another
>> programming language. [...]
Morten> Emacs Lisp comes to mind.. ;-)
Not exactly: AFAIK
Akim,
> In fact, I am still against generic hooks because that's a bad thing
> to do. Nobody where ever imagine doing this in another programming
> language. [...]
Emacs Lisp comes to mind.. ;-)
Regards,
Morten
> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alexandre> Worst case, we can break AC_DEFUNed macros into two macros,
Alexandre> one with the actual name, that contains the prologue and
Alexandre> the epilogue and, between them, an invocation of another
Alexandre> macro, contain
On Jan 24, 2001, Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alexandre> In which case, we might attempt to match pro/epi in the
Alexandre> defn and insert the hooks before/after the actual DEFUN,
Alexandre> i.e., between pro and epi.
> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alexandre> Only if the macro is AC_DEFUNed.
Well, since we're referring to AC_REQUIRE'd macros etc., they are :)
Or where you talking about the cost? Then, yes, agreed, only for
AC_DEFUN'd macros.
~/src/ace % ace -i -t m4_defi
The patch below gives this on the very CVS Automake package:
% diff Makefile.in Makefile.in.old
63a64,67
> CC = @CC@
> CPP = @CPP@
> CXX = @CXX@
> CXXCPP = @CXXCPP@
Index: ChangeLog
from Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* m4/depend.m4 (AM_DEPENDENCIES): Don't leave `AC_PROG_CC' etc.
On Jan 24, 2001, Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So to run a hook you need to insert something *inside* the pro/epi
> pair.
Only if the macro is AC_DEFUNed. In which case, we might attempt to
match pro/epi in the defn and insert the hooks before/after the actual
DEFUN, i.e., between
> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alexandre> On Jan 24, 2001, Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> writes:
Alexandre> I think it's ok. But I agree the code is messy. We need
Alexandre> AC_HOOK(
On Jan 24, 2001, Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alexandre> I think it's ok. But I agree the code is messy. We need
Alexandre> AC_HOOK(MACRO, BEFORE, AFTER) in autoconf.
> Wow! This sounds real hard, or at least, reall
> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alexandre> I think it's ok. But I agree the code is messy. We need
Alexandre> AC_HOOK(MACRO, BEFORE, AFTER) in autoconf.
Wow! This sounds real hard, or at least, really expansive if we do
for all the macros. I was thinking of h
On Jan 24, 2001, Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alexandre> Meanwhile, can't we just hide the uses of AC_PROG_CC and
Alexandre> _CXX from automake by adding ][ in the middle of their
Alexandre> names?
> Right, but the cod
> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alexandre> Meanwhile, can't we just hide the uses of AC_PROG_CC and
Alexandre> _CXX from automake by adding ][ in the middle of their
Alexandre> names?
Right, but the code is already so hairy that I wondered whether I
wanted to add
On Jan 23, 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> So, IMHO, we have just no issue until we release an autoconf --trace
> aware automake. And frankly, I can't wait :) Automake will be much
> shorter (less hard coded knowledge on Autoconf), more robust (less
> hard coded knowledge on Autoconf), and more
I tracked down the CXX definition in the fileutils' Makefile.ins, and
it's damned stupid...
Automake comes with its own set of macros, for instance to set up
AM_DEPENDENCIES. Whoever uses automake will include these macros in
aclocal.m4. Then automake, when scanning aclocal.m4 will find
AC_PRO
17 matches
Mail list logo
