Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit :
"Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
You cannot get rid of these "61 unused macros".
Abdelrazak> I certainly cannot. But you could. And if not, why is
Abdelrazak> that? I am probably missing something here...
If we are dissucssing the same These are byproducts of autoconf tests
that are done, say, by the gettext m4 macros. We cannot get rid of
them.
Then again, autotools and m4 suck badly. If I compile --without-included
-gettext will they disappear?
Did you read what I wrote? concept checking? stdlib-debug? Do you
want to link against two different versions of std::string?
Abdelrazak> Yes, why not? I am interested in concept checking or
Abdelrazak> debugging what I am developing right now. All other debug
Abdelrazak> stuff is not needed. If I need to add a compile another
Abdelrazak> file with these option, I touch it and "make". What's the
Abdelrazak> problem with this approach?
I am not sure that std::string with or without stdlib-debug are binary
compatible. But I may be wrong. Also, when template instantiations are
merged, what happens?
I am not an expert here but if the template instantiation are different
they are not merged. I link debug (heavy STL-using) code with optimized
code all the time without seeing a side effect ever.
The problem is not to acknowledge that autoconf sucks at some things.
Autoconf is known to be able to make big programs portable. The
question is not how to do easily 95% of what autoconf does, it is the rest.
My point is that LyX is a big C++ program that is getting cleaner
everyday and that will soon not need anything of the big autotools
machinery. This powerful tool was designed to help the porting of poorly
implemented spaghetti like C-code. Period.
Abdel.
