[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Stack-like AC_LANG_WERROR

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: Stack-like AC_LANG_WERROR
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 00:00:49 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14)

Hello Andrey,

thanks for your patch, and apologies for the, erm, enormous delay on:

I had actually hoped that someone else would eventually look at your
patch; I'll say what I think of it, but I'm not so sure of the
implications it has, and it's likely it won't make it into 2.62,
sorry.  Also, it will need copyright papers (more off-list).

* Andrey Simonenko wrote on Wed, May 16, 2007 at 03:53:13PM CEST:
> On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 01:49:34PM +0300, Andrey Simonenko wrote:
> > 
> > Each language has own stack of AC_LANG_WERROR settings (first `off'
> > in a stack is the default value):
> This stack of AC_LANG_WERROR settings also can be implemented entirely
> in shell variables, and this will allow to use AC_LANG_WERROR in shell
> functions.

I would probably like a shell function version better.  But more
importantly, this patch needs a testsuite addition to exercise the new
(and the old! claiming compatibility) behavior.  And a NEWS entry.

> >+settings for the current language.  Each language has own stack that

s/has/& its/

> >+is used exclusively by this macro for saving and restoring settings.
> >+If @var{value} is @code{pop}, then settings, that are saved on the top

I think no comma after 'settings'.

> >+of the stack, are restored and are removed from the stack.

I wonder a bit whether the functionality should be in two new macros

where the optional argument to POP would allow for a consistency check
with the one passed to the previous PUSH.  This would be nicely similar

Cheers, and apologies again for the delay,

reply via email to

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