On Wed, 15 Jun 2005, Marcus Holland-Moritz wrote:
[ ... ]
> Obviously, I could check for a compiler in my Makefile.PL.
> However, I do check for so many other things that this
> file has already grown to over 700 lines. I wonder if it's
> worth making this file even more complex just to add a
> check that doesn't serve any purpose other than to make
> test reports from systems without a compiler pass.
> (Besides, the best I could get is NA, since the module
> still wouldn't work.)
Perhaps one thing that could be done in cases like imacat is
to change the tester's Perl Config.pm to accurately
reflect what's really available on the system; by what's reported:
=====================================================================
Summary of my perl5 (revision 5 version 8 subversion 6) configuration:
Platform:
osname=MSWin32, osvers=4.0, archname=MSWin32-x86-multi-thread
[ ... ]
Compiler:
cc='cl',
[ ... ]
=====================================================================
a module author can reasonably expect that a working C
compiler (cl) is present. As Marcus says, adding checks to
see if what Config.pm says is really true or not seems
extreme.
--
best regards,
randy kobes
