libtool
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: TODO


From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: TODO
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 17:54:12 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Wed, Nov 10, 2004 at 05:37:19PM CET:
> Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > * Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Wed, Nov 10, 2004 at 02:25:11PM CET:
> >>Gah, perl?  Blech.  XML?  Bah!  Choke...
> > 
> >>There... I've got it off my chest, and feel much better now :-)
> > 
> > /me agrees on everything you said except about perl.
> 
> Just curious...  Do you mean that you disagree with my perl rant?

Kind of.  Perl readability depends on both the eye of the beholder and
the mind of the writer.  But I strongly agree on all the other cruft.

> >>Libtool already depends on C, so we don't need to resort to Perl.  We can
> >>always prototype something in Perl, and then before we forget what all
> >>those strings of puntuation do, we should convert it to Shell and/or C.
> 
> Or that you think prototyping in Perl is dumb?

Nope.  I rather think that it won't give libtool much that shell cannot.
Use more shell functions.

> > Why prototype in perl what you can write in shell (or other) right away?
> 
> I think there is value in prototyping in HLL to work out algorithmic
> issues before writing the real implementation in a LLL for speed.  Arguably,
> ltmain.sh is our HLL prototype.  Except that it seems to be a good idea
> to separate platform details from rules at this point, so we probably need
> another prototype now :-l

Why can't this separation be done in ltmain.sh?

> > My vote: against everything but shell and C for ltmain.  For the rules,
> > make might prove fine (except that the portable set is quite limited).
> > I'd do C++ (with STL), but that's out of the question portably-wise.
> 
> <rant>
> Gah, C++?  Bleh!
> </rant>
> 
> Kidding!
> 
> Sure, introducing another dependency is only a good idea if there are
> definite tangible benefits.  I've enumerated a few, but probably not
> enough to make it an obvious choice.  Of course, the person who implements
> it gets the casting vote ;-)

/me runs away quickly. :)

Regards,
Ralf




reply via email to

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