On Friday 06 May 2005 5:17 am, Keith Marshall wrote:
> Attached is a small script, demonstrating a possible `searchpath' shell
> function.
Drat! Forgot the attachment! Here it is now ...
searchpath.sh.gz
Description: GNU Zip compressed data
___
Grof
> > is there a way to reset refer settings somewhere 'downstream' if
> > the 'upstream' defaults are no good?
> >
> > specifically:
> >
> > in my document I source a certain defaults file in which, upon
> > different other settings, one finds:
> >
> > ...
> > .R1
> > database the_standard_database
Good news for you, Jeff. Finally!
Werner
--- Begin Message ---
Werner LEMBERG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is there any reason to stay with `.cc' as the extension for C++ files
> for the autoconf tests, given that `.cpp' is much more portable?
Not that I know of. I installed your patch.
Peter Schaffter wrote:
On Wed, May 04, 2005, joerg van den hoff wrote:
hi all,
is there a way to reset refer settings somewhere 'downstream' if the
'upstream' defaults are no good?
specifically:
in my document I source a certain defaults file in which, upon different
other settings, one finds:
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 03:51:17AM +0100, Keith Marshall wrote:
> On Thursday 05 May 2005 7:40 pm, Zvezdan Petkovic wrote:
> > BTW, I don't think Cygwin should be a measure of Unix compatibility.
>
> Possibly not; but, like it or not, Microsoft Windows has the largest user
> base of any OS on the
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 01:59:21PM +0200, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> > Is there any reason to stay with `.cc' as the extension for C++ files
> > for the autoconf tests, given that `.cpp' is much more portable?
>
> Not that I know of. I installed your patch. Thanks.
Sorry I didn't follow this threa
On Friday 06 May 2005 8:09 pm, Zvezdan Petkovic wrote:
> Obviously only gmake recognizes .cpp as a C++ file on a Unix system.
> With older version of gmake on a different Unix machine .cpp has not
> been recognized.
This is precisely the reason why I suggested a slightly more sophisticated
patch,
> Sorry I didn't follow this thread and exact reason to change.
> I see this as a good reason to leave it as .cc
There are at least two C++ compilers (MSVC and a native OS/390 one)
which can't handle the `.cc' extension, while *all* C++ compilers can
handle `.cpp'.
> c++ -O2 -o tryme tryme.c
On Friday 06 May 2005 9:54 pm, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Keith Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Friday 06 May 2005 8:09 pm, Zvezdan Petkovic wrote:
> >> Obviously only gmake recognizes .cpp as a C++ file on a Unix system.
> >> With older version of gmake on a different Unix machine .cpp has n
Keith Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Friday 06 May 2005 8:09 pm, Zvezdan Petkovic wrote:
>> Obviously only gmake recognizes .cpp as a C++ file on a Unix system.
>> With older version of gmake on a different Unix machine .cpp has not
>> been recognized.
Sorry, I don't get the connection
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 09:44:06PM +0200, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> There are at least two C++ compilers (MSVC and a native OS/390 one)
> which can't handle the `.cc' extension, while *all* C++ compilers can
> handle `.cpp'.
I know that.
> Whether `make' programs recognize the `.cpp' extension by d
> I should have known better than to question the wisdom of groff
> developers. I guess I got paranoid using some other software where
> people are quick to introduce changes without thinking them through.
> Sorry for the noise.
Well, it's sometimes very valuable to have an advocatus diaboli :-)
12 matches
Mail list logo
