[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac
From: |
Ralf Wildenhues |
Subject: |
Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac |
Date: |
Thu, 13 Mar 2008 22:43:33 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) |
* NightStrike wrote on Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 10:35:47PM CET:
>
> Ok, now I understand. This is quite an interesting situation. I am
> guessing that this is why tools like autoscan or autoupdate will use
> actual case/if statements instead of the AS_CASE/IF macros.
Where do they do that? autoscan and autoupdate mostly predate these
AS_CASE/IF features.
> The bottom line is that if I stay away from AC_REQUIRE inside of these
> macros, there shouldn't ever be a problem, yes?
Sure. But originally, this was invented as a feature, not a problem, so
you may get into the situation to use it as such. ;-)
Cheers,
Ralf
- AS_CASE vs case/esac, NightStrike, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, Ralf Wildenhues, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, NightStrike, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, Ralf Wildenhues, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, NightStrike, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac,
Ralf Wildenhues <=
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, NightStrike, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, Ralf Wildenhues, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, NightStrike, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, Ralf Wildenhues, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, NightStrike, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, Ralf Wildenhues, 2008/03/13
- Re: AS_CASE vs case/esac, Ralf Wildenhues, 2008/03/13