[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: porting with autotools
From: |
NightStrike |
Subject: |
Re: porting with autotools |
Date: |
Tue, 31 Aug 2010 00:40:49 -0400 |
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hello Reuben,
>
> * Reuben Hawkins wrote on Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 06:00:02PM CEST:
>> > Now, if you are still interested in contributing, and maybe in perl
>> > rather than C, then I will send you the details off-list.
>
>> Yes, I'm interested in contributing, but not in Perl. It'll have to
>> be C code. I'll check back with you in a few weeks when I feel the
>> code is ready.
>
> Adding tool in a compiled language for this purpose doesn't make a lot
> of sense for Autotools; it would needlessly complicate things, and
> probably make the code size a lot bigger. If you don't want to
> reconsider this, we can still profit from your prototype implementation
> by looking at it and translating it (though I don't think I've ever
> translated from C to Perl before ;-)
>
> But maybe one of the other maintainers likes this idea better ...
UML.....
- porting with autotools, Reuben Hawkins, 2010/08/25
- Re: porting with autotools, Gary V. Vaughan, 2010/08/26
- Re: porting with autotools, Reuben Hawkins, 2010/08/26
- Re: porting with autotools, Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/08/27
- Re: porting with autotools, Reuben Hawkins, 2010/08/27
- Re: porting with autotools, Gary V. Vaughan, 2010/08/28
- Re: porting with autotools, Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/08/28
- Re: porting with autotools, Reuben Hawkins, 2010/08/30
- Re: porting with autotools, Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/08/30
- Re: porting with autotools,
NightStrike <=
Re: porting with autotools, Steffen Dettmer, 2010/08/27