"Zack Weinberg" <z...@owlfolio.org> writes: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2023, at 2:38 AM, Łukasz Stelmach wrote: >> Commit 73f1be5e42e3 to autoconf has introduced an argument to >> AC_PROG_LEX. Invocation without the argument has been treated as >> obsolete since then. > > This should go to automake-patches, not autoconf-patches.
Indeed. > Also, you should update the manual (automake.texi) to document that > AM_PROG_LEX now takes an argument and what that argument is. Finally, > I'd like to suggest a small improvement to the code: instead of > >> -AC_REQUIRE([AC_PROG_LEX])dnl >> +AC_PROG_LEX([$1])dnl > > you should have > > -AC_REQUIRE([AC_PROG_LEX])dnl > +AC_PROVIDE_IFELSE([AC_PROG_LEX], [], [AC_PROG_LEX([$@])])dnl > > This change ensures that AC_PROG_LEX will not be invoked a second time > if it has already been used directly, which is important both because > that's the way it has always worked, and because we (autoconf maintainers) > have been telling people to work around the problem you're fixing by using > AC_PROG_LEX _as well as_ AM_PROG_LEX. It also makes AM_PROG_LEX oblivious > to how many arguments AC_PROG_LEX actually takes, which could be important > future-proofing. Thanks for help. I'll send v2 soon. -- Miłego dnia, Łukasz Stelmach
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
