[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: New Erlang-related macro
From: |
Romain Lenglet |
Subject: |
Re: New Erlang-related macro |
Date: |
Fri, 8 Sep 2006 12:58:40 +0900 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.4 |
Paul Eggert wrote:
> Romain Lenglet <address@hidden> writes:
> > Here is a small patch that adds a new Erlang-related macro:
> > AC_ERLANG_SUBST_ERTS_VERSION.
>
> This goes against the usual Autoconf philosophy, which is to
> test for the features you need, rather than to try to guess
> features from version numbers.
I agree.
I also agree that I should add macros to test for the presence of
Erlang modules, and of specific Erlang functions in modules. I
am working on this.
But the AC_ERLANG_SUBST_ERTS_VERSION macro will not be used to
test for features.
> Why is this macro useful in Autoconf scripts? Perhaps there's
> something more Autoconfish that could have the same utility.
In Erlang application "release files", the ERTS version number
must be given explicitly. In the general case, applications
really don't depend on a particular version, but a precise
version number is still required in every release file.
I added that macro to allow substituting that version number in
release files automatically.
That was the motivation also for the substitution of
ERLANG_LIB_VER_<lib> variables in macro
AC_ERLANG_CHECK_LIB(lib): in a release files, the precise
versions of libraries to be distributed with the Erlang
application must be given. With those variables, one can
substitute them automatically.
Does that convince you?
When I will submit a patch for the testing of features (modules
and functions), I propose to also add a word about the purpose
of those variables, in the doc, to discourage their use for
testing features.
Regards,
--
Romain LENGLET