Hello Eric,
* Eric Blake wrote on Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 11:59:04PM CEST:
> Meanwhile, I don't see how warning on unexpected arguments is a
> problem - code that wants to be portable to both old and new
> autoconf will only use as many arguments as the old version
> supported.
Or try to use the new
Eric Blake wrote:
> I have to wonder if there are cases where rejecting extra arguments
> might not be advisable,
No, the behavior should remain the same (silently ignoring them); any
change smells like a dangerous path to follow. The only difference
would be the warnings (well, errors with -Werr
On 08/23/2010 11:02 AM, Yavor Doganov wrote:
I was wondering if it is possible (and whether it is a good idea in
general) autoconf to print warnings for extra macro arguments instead
of silently ignoring them.
I have to wonder if there are cases where rejecting extra arguments
might not be adv
