[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: make libtool faster v2
From: |
Ralf Wildenhues |
Subject: |
Re: make libtool faster v2 |
Date: |
Tue, 30 Nov 2004 18:10:39 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4.1i |
* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 05:42:35PM CET:
> Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > @@ -265,22 +265,26 @@
> >
> > # func_quote_for_eval arg
> > # Aesthetically quote ARG to be evaled later.
> > +# This function returns two values: FUNC_QUOTE_FOR_EVAL_RESULT
> > +# is double-quoted, suitable for a subsequent eval, whereas
> > +# FUNC_QUOTE_FOR_EVAL_UNQUOTED_RESULT has merely all characters
> > +# which are still active within double quotes backslashified.
>
> Hmmm, this will spoil my plans for writing an m4 macro that will
> accept stylised but readable declarations, but generate the (ugly)
> portable shell code we are currently writing by hand.
But this will be spoiled only for this special function, right?
> One of the things I'm aiming at is being able to put "return $val"
> in the hand written code, and generate "<func_name>_result=$val".
Sounds good, in general.
> However, in the spirit of eXtreme Programming, I'll cross that
> bridge when I come to it. This is a good patch with tangible
> benefits now, and my code is still in my head :-)
Well, to me it looks like this will remain the only function with such
an interface. But since it's such a performance hog, I really would
dislike it being dropped purely for asthetic reasons.
My next patch will, however, make use of computed functions, for
readability. Maybe they'll spoil your plan as well..
> Please go ahead.
Thanks.
Regards,
Ralf