[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Autoconf] Re: What compiler was it?
From: |
Ian Lance Taylor |
Subject: |
[Autoconf] Re: What compiler was it? |
Date: |
19 Sep 2000 09:09:06 -0700 |
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 17:42:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: Pavel Roskin <address@hidden>
Sorry for the slow reply. I was on vacation.
You made the following change in Autoconf:
Thu May 28 18:37:36 1998 Ian Lance Taylor <address@hidden>
(AC_TRY_CPP): Remove lines from stderr which contain only the name
of the file.
Do you remember what compiler produced such lines? I'm especially
interested whether it's a pure C compiler or C++ is affected as well.
Here is the entire ChangeLog entry that I see in my copy of the
sources:
Add support for Visual C++:
* acgeneral.m4 (ac_exeext, ac_objext): New variables.
(ac_link): Use ac_exeext.
(AC_TRY_COMPILER, AC_TRY_LINK, AC_TRY_RUN_NATIVE): Likewise.
(AC_TRY_CPP): Remove lines from stderr which contain only the name
of the file.
(AC_REPLACE_FUNCS): Use ac_objext.
* acspecific.m4 (AC_PROG_CC): Check whether compiler supports -g
even if it is not gcc.
(AC_PROG_CXX): Likewise.
(AC_PROG_CPP): Try running the compiler with the -nologo option.
(AC_FUNC_ALLOCA): Check for _MSC_VER. Use ac_objext.
(AC_FUNC_MEMCMP): Use ac_objext.
(AC_STRUCT_ST_BLOCKS): Likewise.
(AC_OBJEXT): New macro.
(AC_CYGWIN32, AC_MINGW32, AC_EXEEXT): New macros.
* configure: Rebuild.
As you can see from the first line of the ChangeLog entry, the
compiler in question was Visual C++. This is a Microsoft product. It
handles both C and C++, so C++ is indeed affected.
Also a comment needs to be added to AC_TRY_CPP to avoid such questions in
the future.
Unfortunately, the mailing list archives start with October 1998, so I
cannot find the answer there.
For everybody else, it's a good idea to comment what breakage is being
worked around to avoid questions two years later :-)
I could have added a comment to AC_TRY_CPP. I'm undecided as to
whether that would be a good idea or not. I think the ChangeLog entry
does describe the breakage adequately. But then, I am not of the
school of thought in which every action requires an extensive
explanation.
Ian
- [Autoconf] Re: What compiler was it?,
Ian Lance Taylor <=