bug-gnu-utils
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: argp spec


From: Miles Bader
Subject: Re: argp spec
Date: 12 Sep 2002 14:42:59 +0900

address@hidden (Niels Möller) writes:
> > Did you do a major rewrite of the parser, or put in a hacked version of
> > getopt_long that's reentrant?
> 
> I more or less rewrote the parser, copying some code (basically, parts
> of parser_parse_next, and the exchange function that is used to
> permute arguments, iirc) from GNU getopt.

Even cooler...

Does this mean you could get rid of the memory allocation in the parser?
[That was one thing I though might be possible with a `native' parser,
since it could just walk the data-structures passed in by the user
during parsing.]

Hmmm, now there's even more reason to fold your changes back into glibc
(and I gather it's gotten a lot of testing in lsh too).

If we make a more standard drop-in version of argp, what would your
requirements be for using it in lsh?

As I mentioned in my previous message I'm think of something like the
libc glob code, where you can basically just copy a directory into your
source tree for distribution, and it will contains its own configure and
Makefile file &c., which you can call from your configure/Makefile, and
it would install a static library <somewhere> in the build tree for you
to link against.  The configure script would presumably auto-detect
glibc's argp and arrange for itself to be ignored when it finds that.

[I don't think there's much need for complicated things like shared
library support, since anyone using a standard-enough system
infrastructure to benefit from it is probably already using glibc
(which contains argp).  Sun is probably an exception, but they're not
going to use the standard build stuff anyway.]

I'd really appreciate some input from those that are more experienced
at this sort of standard build-system setup stuff....

> I'm afraid there's no vendor tags in my cvs, you just have to compare
> to revision 1.1 of the files, which should be the same code as in
> glibc-2.1. So it's probably easiest to get the latest version, and
> diff that to glibc-2.1.

Ok; I guess glibc at least must have tags...

Thanks,

-Miles
-- 
o The existentialist, not having a pillow, goes everywhere with the book by
  Sullivan, _I am going to spit on your graves_.




reply via email to

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