On Fri, July 18, 2008 8:07 pm, Carl Lowenstein wrote:
> If I may allude to an old discussion, isn't this an argument for
> embedding people-readable tags in object files?
>
> carl
This is a clever and valid use of key words. Something like:
static char* OBJVER="$Version";
That's from dim memory, so it may be syntactically wrong, but it gets the
idea across.
My problem with that, and with all key words is this: at check in/commit,
the system will usually do a diff _before_ to see if the file's changed.
But any diff _after_ will say the files are different, even if they
aren't. A human can easily spot that it's just a key word, but it's plain
hell to script:
set return [exec diff $a $b]
if {return != 0} {
# do something
}
... or ...
set return [exec diff $a $b]
if {return != 0} {
if {[some goddam thing to scan for keywords]} {
# do something
}
}
If key words are to be expanded, it's perhaps better to segregate them in
a header included in all source: keywords.h. Then the diffs are true, the
objects have the data strings, and the other source files remain true.
Given a choice between key words and accurate diffs (and I have been given
that choice in the past), I'll always go with sacrosanct source.
I really need to stay out of this discussion and learn from the list.
--
Lan Barnes
SCM Analyst Linux Guy
Tcl/Tk Enthusiast Biodiesel Brewer
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
