[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: make libtool faster v2

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: make libtool faster v2
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 18:10:39 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 05:42:35PM CET:
> Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > @@ -265,22 +265,26 @@
> >  
> >  # func_quote_for_eval arg
> >  # Aesthetically quote ARG to be evaled later.
> > +# This function returns two values: FUNC_QUOTE_FOR_EVAL_RESULT
> > +# is double-quoted, suitable for a subsequent eval, whereas
> > +# FUNC_QUOTE_FOR_EVAL_UNQUOTED_RESULT has merely all characters
> > +# which are still active within double quotes backslashified.
> Hmmm, this will spoil my plans for writing an m4 macro that will
> accept stylised but readable declarations, but generate the (ugly)
> portable shell code we are currently writing by hand.

But this will be spoiled only for this special function, right?

> One of the things I'm aiming at is being able to put "return $val"
> in the hand written code, and generate "<func_name>_result=$val".

Sounds good, in general.

> However, in the spirit of eXtreme Programming, I'll cross that
> bridge when I come to it.  This is a good patch with tangible
> benefits now, and my code is still in my head :-)

Well, to me it looks like this will remain the only function with such
an interface.  But since it's such a performance hog, I really would
dislike it being dropped purely for asthetic reasons.

My next patch will, however, make use of computed functions, for
readability.  Maybe they'll spoil your plan as well..

> Please go ahead.



reply via email to

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