[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: bison-20001221

From: Jesse Thilo
Subject: Re: bison-20001221
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 10:17:17 -0500

On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 02:17:46PM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
> Well, I supposed they were building the whole distro, but you proved
> they didn't.  I'm in favor of putting the whole dist under CVS, which
> was not the choice of Jesse.  Jesse, any problem if I include the full
> tarball under CVS?

No *problem* as such.  I think it's silly, but that's my only

> Hans> - On a number of places there is include <config.h> It should be
> Hans> include "config.h"
> I never quite understood the difference between the two, and some
> people will tell you to do just the opposite (see the Autoconf doc for
> a start).

I agree with Hans on this point, but few others. ;-) I like to put
system-provided header files in brokets, and package-provided header
files in quotes.  Aside from being the actual intent behind the
difference, it distinguishes them visually and it makes gcc's -MM
option work better.  Rule of thumb: if a header file has a reasonable
chance of being modified during development, put it in quotes.
config.h certainly qualifies.  The only files *not* likely to be
modified (barring an OS upgrade) are system header files.

> Hans> - File "xstrdup.c", "xmalloc.c", and others, contains platform
> Hans> specific seemingly unneeded #include <sys/types.h>
> Fetched from elsewhere, and I trust the guy who wrote them.
> Hans> - Files "quote.c", "quote_arg.c" includes platform specific
> Hans> <sys/types.h>.  
> So what?

Agreed: so what?  <sys/types.h> is platform specific, but the platform
is POSIX, which is a widely recognized standard.  Akim is right: we
are not going to touch imported library files.  It's too much
headache.  Feel free to report any problems to the maintainer(s) of
those files, however.

reply via email to

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