lynx-dev
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: lynx-dev lynx2.8.2dev.25d-cpp.patch.gz


From: dickey
Subject: Re: lynx-dev lynx2.8.2dev.25d-cpp.patch.gz
Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 17:21:18 -0400 (EDT)

> 
> On Fri, 7 May 1999, Leonid Pauzner wrote: 
>  
> > >      * From: Vlad Harchev <address@hidden> 
> >  
> > > On Wed, 5 May 1999 address@hidden wrote: 
> >  
> > >> I didn't put Vlad's most recent patch into the pre-release (it makes 
> > >> assumptions about the function and availability of the C preprocessor 
> > >> which 
> > >> I've found in the past to be not true). 
> > >> 
> > >> The generated html looks good - but I see adding this as an experimental 
> > >> feature which is not available on some platforms.  However, even that 
> > >> requires some maintainance effort - it relies on a handcrafted version 
> > >> of 
> > >> lynx.cfg 
> >  
> > It is reasonable to include generated *.html files into the 2.8.2 
> > distribution (like we have with gettext' lynx.pot) and leave portability 
> > and maintenance for 2.8.3 development. At least we got a very useful 
> > resource (hmm, make install-cfghelp ?) and set a starting point for future 
> > resync body.in with lynx.cfg. See also Vlad's letter below. 
>  
>   IMO it's also reasonable to apply this patch. It will modify LYReadCFG.c, 
> making for each setting name "XYZ" at page displaying 'LYNXCFG:/' hyperlinks  
> to "$(helpdir)/lynxcfg.body.html#XYZ". So, even if functionality of 
> standalone c preprocessor is not availble, user will get description of each 
> setting present in lynx.cfg. 
>   We can also modify configure.in so that it will check whether $(CPP) works 
> OK, and if yes, generate *.html files. 

that doesn't work on VMS.

also, it doesn't matter if $(CPP) "works".  there are a number of workable
C preprocessors that simply refuse to process files that don't look like
C language (in fact, there's no requirement that they do so - one of the
problems the X Consortium ran into in porting imake: they had to make
arrangements with some vendors to retain a K&R-style cpp to continue).

>   
> BTW, "Single UNIX specification, Version 2", and POSIX, both require support  
> of '-E' swtich from 'cc' and 'c89' - they should do preprocessing-only, so 
> IMO 
> absense of support for this switch is very rare. 
>  
> >[...]  
>  
>  Best regards, 
>   -Vlad 


-- 
Thomas E. Dickey
address@hidden
http://www.clark.net/pub/dickey

reply via email to

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