Re: FYI Re: 12AT_CHECK_NOESCAPE.diff

[Derek Robert Price]

Akim Demaille wrote:

> Derek, 
>
> I'm confused by your patch.  Could you please describe, for instance
> via some documentation, was is the purpose of these two macros.  The
> style is very unusual (passing an additional argument to have a for of
> if inside the macro).
>
> I believe that you mean to write
>
> m4_defun([AT_CHECK],
> [AT_CHECK_NOESCAPE([$1], [$2], 
>                   [AS_ESCAPE([$3])], [AS_ESCAPE([$4])],
>                   [$5], [$6])])
>  

That's what I had originally, and it turns out that the m4_case 
statement that switches on the values of $3 & $4 started failing for the 
"ignore", "stderr", "stdout", "experr", and "expout" cases.  I suppose I 
could have altered the m4_case to allow "AS_ESCAPE([ignore])", 
"AS_ESCAPE([stderr])", etc. as well as the simple forms, but I thought 
the _AT_CHECK form was more straightforward.

I'm on the way out the door just now, but I can expand the comment in 
the header if you approve of my current model.

Derek

--
               *8^)

Email: address@hidden

Get CVS support at <http://ximbiot.com>!
--
Computer Lie #1: You'll never use all that disk space.