Re: converting netkit to autoconf?

[Paul Eggert]

> Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2002 07:06:09 -0700
> From: Bruce Korb <address@hidden>
> 
> Akim Demaille wrote:
> > M4 quotes are the most consistent one can design.
> 
> The rules are consistent.  The quoting is not.
> The author of a macro must know what the current quoting sequence
> is and the invoker of that macro must ensure that that is, in fact,
> the current sequence when the macro is invoked.

That is a problem with M4 in general, but it is not a problem with
Autoconf's use of M4, since Autoconf consistently uses [] for quotes.

> If handling the quoting is so simple, why do you suppose so many
> people find it so hard?

Since you're repeating the question, I can't resist repeating my answer:

 "Quoting is _always_ hard.  In every language that has arbitrary
  strings.  One cannot escape it."


> > I expect a lot from shell functions.  Including saving
> > space, and improving performances  (with good shells).
> 
> With configure scripts buring half a meg or more of space,
> I'm thinking space might be the greater concern. ...

No, performance is by bigger problem for me, and I think for most
people.  I have lots of disk space, and "configure" scripts compress
well.  But my uniprocessors go only so fast, and currently "configure"
scripts are sequential.  Right now, it sometimes takes longer to for
me to configure a package than to compile it, and this is ridiculous.