Re: [PATCH] A better (?) _AC_EXEEXT

[Morten Eriksen]

* Akim
| Then let me restate my question: why don't you use AC_TRY_EVAL just
| like in AC_EXEXT: this is a good first step I think.

Umm.. I assume you mean to ask "why not use AC_TRY_EVAL in AC_EXEEXT
just like in AC_OBJEXT" (and not "..like in AC_EXEEXT")?

If so, my question for you is then: what should AC_TRY_EVAL evaluate?
I can't think of any suitable command which would uncover how to use
executable suffices on the system -- without already _knowing_ the
suffix.  :^/

Note that AC_TRY_EVAL(ac_link) is _not_ the correct answer, as ac_link
contains a reference to $ac_exeext (which of course means a circular
dependency back to AC_EXEEXT).

Regards,
Morten