[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AT_CHECK within for loop
From: |
Ralf Wildenhues |
Subject: |
Re: AT_CHECK within for loop |
Date: |
Fri, 28 Jan 2011 20:17:00 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.20 (2010-08-04) |
* Joel E. Denny wrote on Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 08:06:38PM CET:
> A way to get the best of both worlds might be to permit shell functions
> containing AT_CHECK to be defined outside of AT_SETUP. I believe that is
> not possible with autotest now, and I have no idea if it's feasible to
> implement.
That is possible right now, either in atlocal.in or in PREPARE_TESTS
diversions:
m4_divert_push([PREPARE_TESTS])dnl
function_defined_once ()
{
...
}
m4_divert_pop([PREPARE_TESTS])dnl
Cheers,
Ralf
- AT_CHECK within for loop, Daily, Jeff A, 2011/01/28
- Re: AT_CHECK within for loop, Eric Blake, 2011/01/28
- Re: AT_CHECK within for loop, Joel E. Denny, 2011/01/28
- Re: AT_CHECK within for loop, Eric Blake, 2011/01/28
- Re: AT_CHECK within for loop, Joel E. Denny, 2011/01/28
- Re: AT_CHECK within for loop,
Ralf Wildenhues <=
- Re: AT_CHECK within for loop, Joel E. Denny, 2011/01/28
- Re: AT_CHECK within for loop, Ralf Wildenhues, 2011/01/28
- Re: AT_CHECK within for loop, Ralf Wildenhues, 2011/01/29