[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Patches for implementing checking for valid CFLAGS, LDFLAGS, etc.

From: Peter Simons
Subject: Re: Patches for implementing checking for valid CFLAGS, LDFLAGS, etc.
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2011 11:22:50 +0200

Hi Maarten,

 > There are a lot of macros dealing with checking which flags can be
 > used with the compiler (or other tools), all subtly different. I set
 > out to analyse the advantages and disadvantages of each and use that
 > to write an implementation that can be used to replace them all.

I have pushed your patches to the Git repository moments ago. Thank you
very much for your efforts!

 > The implementation of the new macros is partly based on
 > some copyright from those in the new macro, is this right?

Yes, I think it is. Even if it weren't a legal requirement, it still
feels like good practice to give credit where credit is due.

 > There are some AX_APPEND_* macros added, should these be in the same
 > file or separate?

If at all possible, there should be just one macro per m4 file. That
policy allows tools like aclocal(1) to pull macros into a project with
high precision. Also, it means that the name of the macro matches the
name of the m4 file, which makes things easier for the user.

 > For ax_check_*_flags and ax_*_check_flag I used AU_DEFUN to provide
 > an implementation based on the new macros that is automatically
 > updated when running autoupdate. Is this the right approach, or
 > should I leave the deprecated macros as the were and only add a
 > message on top of the description?

Using AU_DEFUN to replace obsolete macros with the newer version is very
desirable. Yes, please do that! :-)

Again, thank you very much for your efforts!

Take care,

reply via email to

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