Well, I will disable the to-be-written chapter in the doc, I don't
have time to write it now, and I don't feel comfortable with using
Elf's material without his approval.
Let's flush all the documentation related patches, Lars' cleanups, and
target an actual release ne
all the documentation related patches, Lars' cleanups, and
> target an actual release next week.
>
> Alexandre, when we release Autoconf, could you make tag and make a
> branch for bug fixes on 2.50?
>
>
> I think 2.51 will probably be released soon afterwards.
Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think 2.51 will probably be released soon afterwards. Nonetheless, I
> would like to introduce deep internal changes: introduce autom4te. I'd
> like autom4te to be written in Perl, i.e., starting from 2.51, Autoconf
> will require Perl, and the same
On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 02:17:19AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I think 2.51 will probably be released soon afterwards. Nonetheless, I
> > would like to introduce deep internal changes: introduce autom4te. I'd
> > like autom4te to be written in Pe
> "Thomas" == Thomas Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> [Perl] How does this sound?
Thomas> not acceptable (let's not let your biases get in the way)
:) :) :)
Well, my biases are the PITA that represents maintaining a sed + sh +
awk program such as autoconf. autoconf is _slow_, very sl
> "Russ" == Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Russ> One of the parts of my regular day job is compiling free
Russ> software for all the platforms we support. My experience is
Russ> that the majority, possibly the vast majority, of projects that
Russ> use autoconf do not use automake.
Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hm, how come we face different realities? Is it something domain
> specific? For instance, in my case, the last packages I can think about
> that did not use Automake where GAWK and findutils (aside from the
> compiling suites).
Well, just in a quick
> Well, just in a quick check of some of the stuff that I've compiled
> recently and just judging by whether or not there are Makefile.am files
> (so I could miss some automake projects that don't distribute those files
> or call them something different), grace, xlispstat, gnuplot, vim, and
> xe
On Apr 10, 2001, Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd like autom4te to be written in Perl, i.e., starting from 2.51,
> Autoconf will require Perl, and the same Perl as Automake.
I hate Perl. Really. I mean it.
I'd much rather go for Python or some other readable scripting
language.
> "Russ" == Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Russ> Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Hm, how come we face different realities? Is it something domain
>> specific? For instance, in my case, the last packages I can think
>> about that did not use Automake where GAWK and fin
> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alexandre> On Apr 10, 2001, Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I'd like autom4te to be written in Perl, i.e., starting from 2.51,
>> Autoconf will require Perl, and the same Perl as Automake.
Alexandre> I hate Perl. Reall
On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 10:58:37AM +0200, Akim Demaille wrote:
: Let's flush all the documentation related patches, Lars' cleanups, and
: target an actual release next week.
There are no showstoppers left?
: I think 2.51 will probably be released soon afterwards. Nonetheless,
: I wou
On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 02:23:03PM +0200, Akim Demaille wrote:
: Honestly, I didn't even mention Python because I think it is too
: strong a required as opposed to Perl. But if Python is accepted, I'd
: be happy to learn it and use it for Autoconf.
:
: I don't know if Guile is a serious candidat
> "Lars" == Lars J Aas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> Anyways, is "deep internal changes" really something for a +.1
Lars> version increment? It sounds like a 3.0 rewrite to me - which
Lars> we could of course fork off, but I think there's still a lot of
Lars> living left to do for 2.* be
Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Alexandre> I hate Perl. Really. I mean it.
> I hate it less than I used to, but it is still definitely not my
> favorite. I like it much more than sh though (both Bourne sh, and
> mod
Akim Demaille wrote:
>
> Let's flush all the documentation related patches, Lars' cleanups, and
> target an actual release next week.
I am in favor for letting autoconf-2.50 be preceeded by a at least 4
weeks long "code-freeze", "inevitable bug-fixes only&quo
> "Russ" == Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Russ> I hate to say this, but C *is* pretty portable, and you can
Russ> probably assume that all maintainers who use autoconf have a C
Russ> compiler available. I suppose that the sort of string
Russ> manipulation that autoconf wants to do
>>>>> "Ralf" == Ralf Corsepius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ralf> Akim Demaille wrote:
>> Let's flush all the documentation related patches, Lars' cleanups,
>> and target an actual release next week.
Ralf> I am in favor for letting
On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 02:47:08PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
: Akim Demaille wrote:
: > Let's flush all the documentation related patches, Lars' cleanups, and
: > target an actual release next week.
:
: I am in favor for letting autoconf-2.50 be preceeded by a at least 4
:
On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 02:48:39PM +0200, Akim Demaille wrote:
: > "Russ" == Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
:
: Russ> I hate to say this, but C *is* pretty portable, and you can
: Russ> probably assume that all maintainers who use autoconf have a C
: Russ> compiler available. I sup
> "Lars" == Lars J Aas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> Another scripting language that hasn't been mentioned is Tcl.
I think I did mention the speed issue at some point ;)
No really, I think Perl is the most serious candidate.
On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 11:24:49AM +0200, Akim Demaille wrote:
> Using Perl we let us factor the code, and concentrate on our features
> instead of others' misfeatures.
indeed: if you're not going to make it compatible, why not make that
fact known in the proposal for new work. autoconf 2.49e is
Akim Demaille wrote:
>
> >>>>> "Ralf" == Ralf Corsepius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Ralf> Akim Demaille wrote:
> >> Let's flush all the documentation related patches, Lars' cleanups,
> >> and target an actual release
Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[About changing language for a future Autoconf rewrite]
> No really, I think Perl is the most serious candidate.
Check out this snippet from Automake's TODO file:
rewrite in guile (RMS request)
at the same time, consider adding a GUI
Morten Eriksen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> (It seems a bit silly to go from sh to Perl with Autoconf if Automake is
> planned to be rewritten from Perl to Guile..) :-}
I personally wouldn't mind Guile, if for no other reason than it would
give me a good excuse to learn Scheme. But it definit
On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 02:23:03PM +0200, Akim Demaille wrote:
: So? Let's give a try to Python? Move to Perl 5.5? Other?
I suddenly got the urge to do some ranting :-}
The situation today is that perl has the upper hand and Guile is more or
less just another embeddable scheme interpreter. W
On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 03:19:40PM +0200, Morten Eriksen wrote:
> Check out this snippet from Automake's TODO file:
>
> rewrite in guile (RMS request)
Is this on Automake's TODO list for technical reasons or
political ones? (So call me a cynic, but "RMS request" is pretty
suggestive :-)
> "Eric" == Eric Siegerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> rewrite in guile (RMS request)
Eric> Is this on Automake's TODO list for technical reasons or
Eric> political ones? (So call me a cynic, but "RMS request" is
Eric> pretty suggestive :-)
Political. Guile is the Official GNU scriptin
On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 05:39:28AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Alexandre> I hate Perl. Really. I mean it.
Me too. Every week. It's offensively ugly -- nothing but a
bucket of
Akim Demaille wrote:
>
> >>>>> "Ralf" == Ralf Corsepius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Ralf> Akim Demaille wrote:
> >> Let's flush all the documentation related patches, Lars' cleanups,
> >> and target an actual release
> So? Let's give a try to Python? Move to Perl 5.5? Other?
Python has a core of loyal followers, just like perl and others, but
it also has a core deficiency of using white space for control which
creates the opposite effect of extreme dislike from others. Python
causes more polarization than
Bob Proulx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Many people do not like perl. But when you don't like python you
> REALLY don't like python.
The same goes for some anti-perl-people. I don't believe there is
much difference in that. Unfortunately...
/bart
> From: Bob Proulx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 16:22:01 -0600
>
> Python causes more polarization than any other language.
Clearly you haven't been in the trenches of past language wars. :-)
But if the principal maintainer prefers Perl, that settles the matter.
On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 05:50:41PM -0400, Earnie Boyd wrote:
: Akim Demaille wrote:
: > The thing is, we have already done this. No real patch gets in.
: > Nobody complains about the betas. And no one use them. Let's face
: > it, the only means to have feedback on Autoconf is to release it and
34 matches
Mail list logo
