Garrett Rooney wrote: > On 6/8/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> It's been so long since I did C in anger, I don't grok what the best >> pattern is. I think the latter, as it *seems* easier to contruct >> makefiles, but it could be my rustiness w/ make at this point. > >
[SNIP] > What we ended up with in APR is something like this: > > There's a base implementation of each file that is designed to work on > any unix system. These go in unix/ subdirectories. If it's feasable > to make that file work elsewhere (Netware, Windows, OS/2, BeOS, > whatever) then it's done via ifdefs. If the ifdefs get out of > control, or the platform is really that different then you start > splitting off into platform specific implementations, but that's a > last resort. I'd vote to call it "common" but yes, I agree and was thinking about this approach earlier today, but my goal is to get us minimally integrated and working as fast as possible to let people get going w/ it in an easy manner. So I would think this kind of refactoring is a second step after whatever minimal shuffling we should do to get an easy-to-grok build systme... > > So in the end, the main things to keep in mind are to make your unix > implemenation try to work across as many systems as possible, ifdefing > based on availability of features as much as you can, not based on > specific platforms, and only as a last resort split out into totally > different platform specific implementations. Thanks geir --------------------------------------------------------------------- Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
