[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: O(n) patches and side effects

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: O(n) patches and side effects
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:52:08 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

* Eric Blake wrote on Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 03:34:29PM CEST:
> According to Ralf Wildenhues on 8/22/2008 12:23 AM:
> > Should foreach.m4 and m4sugar.m4 have comments to the end of
> > "please keep macro names and semantics aligned with the other file"?
> Yes, good idea.  I'm committing the patch below.


> > Do you think we may need to put some measure in place to enforce this?
> The testsuite already does much of this - the "recursion" test runs both
> implementations (if you use m4 1.6) by messing around with __m4_version__
> before calling m4_init.

Ah, that detail evaded my eyes.

> My hope is that any one-sided API or semantic changes would thus be
> caught.

Yes, as long as somebody runs with m4 1.6 once in a while, that should
be fine.

> I've tried to give decent comments for all of
> my hacks to make m4sugar fast, but readily admit that m4sugar is not the
> best file for m4 beginners to go reading (lots of black magic in there).

Neither for intermediates.  Oh well.  Comments are ok, it's the m4
language that inherently takes a special state of mind to dig through.


reply via email to

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