I didn't mean to pick on the Mac, it was just the easiest one to grab all the defines out of. :)
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Mike Pinkerton <pinker...@chromium.org> wrote: > Note these are only for building WebKit, not any of the Chromium > files. I think Win does something similar, no? > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Evan Martin <e...@chromium.org> wrote: >> >> I agree with this in principle, but we're long past that, I think? >> From one of the Mac build files: >> >> FEATURE_DEFINES = "ENABLE_DATABASE=1 >> ENABLE_DASHBOARD_SUPPORT=0 >> ENABLE_JAVASCRIPT_DEBUGGER=0 ENABLE_JSC_MULTIPLE_THREADS=0 >> ENABLE_ICONDATABASE=0 ENABLE_XSLT=1 ENABLE_XPATH=1 ENABLE_SVG=1 >> ENABLE_SVG_ANIMATION=1 ENABLE_SVG_AS_IMAGE=1 ENABLE_SVG_USE=1 >> ENABLE_SVG_FOREIGN_OBJECT=1 ENABLE_SVG_FONTS=1 ENABLE_VIDEO=0 >> WEBCORE_NAVIGATOR_PLATFORM_=\"FixMeAndRemoveTrailingUnderscore\" >> USE_GOOGLE_URL_LIBRARY USE_SYSTEM_MALLOC=1 >> XP_MACOSX=1\nENABLE_DATABASE=1 ENABLE_DASHBOARD_SUPPORT=0 >> ENABLE_JAVASCRIPT_DEBUGGER=0 ENABLE_JSC_MULTIPLE_THREADS=0 >> ENABLE_ICONDATABASE=0 ENABLE_XSLT=1 ENABLE_XPATH=1 ENABLE_SVG=1 >> ENABLE_SVG_ANIMATION=1 ENABLE_SVG_AS_IMAGE=1 ENABLE_SVG_USE=1 >> ENABLE_SVG_FOREIGN_OBJECT=1 ENABLE_SVG_FONTS=1 ENABLE_VIDEO=0 >> WEBCORE_NAVIGATOR_PLATFORM_=\"FixMeAndRemoveTrailingUnderscore\" >> USE_GOOGLE_URL_LIBRARY USE_SYSTEM_MALLOC=1 XP_MACOSX=1"; >> >> (PS: Now that I look, XP_MACOSX is in there twice -- maybe the >> embedded \n made the first one go through.) >> >> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Darin Fisher <da...@chromium.org> wrote: >>> +1 >>> Google style encourages including everything you need in the source. There >>> should be no magic -include lines required to build the source. >>> This is why pre-compiled headers are disabled in release builds. If they >>> were not, then over time people would only be able to build the source if >>> they included the precompiled header on the command line. >>> -Darin >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 8:11 PM, Mark Mentovai <m...@chromium.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> I don't agree with this approach. I think that we should include what >>>> we use, and that should extend to headers that provide nonstandard >>>> macro definitions. I think that we should be expressing as much as >>>> possible in code rather than in build environments. Most importantly, >>>> I don't like the idea of globally polluting the macro namespace for >>>> something like this. Our OS_* macros are ours (emphasis on "ours") >>>> and I don't want to leak those defines to all of the other third-party >>>> code that we build. >>>> >>>> Mark >>>> >>>> Evan Martin wrote: >>>> > A few people I've talked to independently have expressed interest in >>>> > getting rid of build/build_config.h. >>>> > >>>> > It is easy to forget to include, requires being included in a >>>> > nonstandard place, and ends up being used everywhere anyway. It is >>>> > easier to just define the few #defines we need in build scripts. (I >>>> > think the compiler- and architecture- specific defines could move to a >>>> > different file eventually, but we almost never use those.) >>>> > >>>> > http://codereview.chromium.org/21401 does this. It seems to work on >>>> > Windows (I'd like an expert to doublecheck I did it the right way) but >>>> > my wild guess at making Mac work is apparently wrong. If any Mac >>>> > expert could help out, I'd appreciate it. >>>> >>>> >> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > > > -- > Mike Pinkerton > Mac Weenie > pinker...@google.com > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
