[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: porting with autotools

From: Reuben Hawkins
Subject: Re: porting with autotools
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 13:57:52 -0700

On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 9:40 PM, NightStrike <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Hello Reuben,
>> * Reuben Hawkins wrote on Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 06:00:02PM CEST:
>>> > Now, if you are still interested in contributing, and maybe in perl
>>> > rather than C, then I will send you the details off-list.
>>> Yes, I'm interested in contributing, but not in Perl.  It'll have to
>>> be C code.  I'll check back with you in a few weeks when I feel the
>>> code is ready.
>> Adding tool in a compiled language for this purpose doesn't make a lot
>> of sense for Autotools; it would needlessly complicate things, and
>> probably make the code size a lot bigger.  If you don't want to
>> reconsider this, we can still profit from your prototype implementation
>> by looking at it and translating it (though I don't think I've ever
>> translated from C to Perl before ;-)
>> But maybe one of the other maintainers likes this idea better ...
> UML.....

So it seem to be working.  amgen now scans the source and headers it
finds to come up with a reasonable include path.  Anyone interested
can get the source here...


The only thing I left out was to recursively scan the included headers
to flesh out the include path (maybe I'll get to that sometime).

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]