On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:09 AM, David Cantrell <da...@cantrell.org.uk>wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 06:55:00AM -0500, David Golden wrote:
> > There's a debate at the moment on #p5p about whether it's an error to
> have
> > $Config{cc} and not have the named compiler. If so, every AS perl is
> > "broken".
>
> As is perl as distributed by Debian, Redhat and no doubt others, as you
> can install them without installing a compiler. You can even install a
> *different* compiler, such as icc or Sun's cc instead of gcc, or gcc
> instead of MIPSpro on Irix, or ...
>
Here's the Pod for Config on the subject (Nicholas Clark cited it to me on
IRC):
"cc"
From cc.U:
This variable holds the name of a command to execute a C compiler
which can resolve multiple global references that happen to have
the same name. Usual values are "cc" and "gcc". Fervent "ANSI"
compilers may be called "c89". "AIX" has xlc.
So technically, one could say that installing a perl without a compiler
should clear the $Config{cc} setting, as there is no command to execute a C
compiler.
Practically speaking, this is night impossible, so the IRC discussion
concluded that there was little to be done about it.
-- David
