It's not a good assumption that the default result of a C compilation
is named "a.out". On Cygwin, e.g., it's a.exe. Some compilers
default to filename.exe or bare filename (when compiling filename.c).
I think you may have to assume that it accepts the -o option and give
the tested-for executable an explicit name.
On 6/5/07, Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, James Keenan via RT wrote:
> On Fri Jun 01 09:29:18 2007, chromatic <!-- x --> at wgz.org wrote:
> > This patch is very close. Instead of handling compilation manually, I
> > recommend instead using cc_gen() and cc_build() from
> > Parrot::Configure::Step.
> > See config/auto/sizes.pm for an example.
> Can you explain why using these functions would be the better course? In
particular, how
> would this approach square with the criticism Andy Dougherty made earlier
in this thread on
> March 21:
>
> > + unless ( eval { cc_build(); 1 } ) {
> > + warn "Compilation failed with '$cc'\n";
> > + exit 1;
> > + }
>
> > This has two problems. First, it ignores the return value of cc_build().
> > That's understandable at the moment since cc_build doesn't seem to have
a
> > documented return value. It should, of course.
I agree with chromatic -- I'd simply add that the cc_build() function
should be improved to have a meaningful return value, not that it should
be avoided.
--
Andy Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Mark J. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
