Re: 30-transform-cond.patch

2001-02-08 Thread Akim Demaille
Tom Tromey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Akim This patch includes the Makefile.ins' diffs, i.e., no changes. Umm, there are plenty of Makefile.in changes here. Right, and a lot of thanks for reviewing them into the details! Some are whitespace changes, which I'd prefer not to change: Akim

Re: 30-transform-cond.patch

2001-02-08 Thread Akim Demaille
Tom Tromey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I do like the patch. But I'd like these things to be fixed before you check it in. Here is what I checked in. Thanks for noticing! -- Here is the version I'm applying. The changes

Re: 30-transform-cond.patch

2001-02-08 Thread Tom Tromey
"Akim" == Akim Demaille [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Akim Here is the version I'm applying. The changes Tom noted were Akim due to my writing $pair instead of $pairs. I hope some day we Akim really use strict... And prototypes, which will require a lot Akim of massage, since it means functions

Re: 30-transform-cond.patch

2001-02-07 Thread Tom Tromey
"Akim" == Akim Demaille [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Akim A very stupid and mechanic patch, indeed, but it helps me seeing what Akim happens. In this patch I took the freedom of introducing a new Akim syntax: @FOO@ means `to be substituted', while `?FOO?' means to be Akim removed if positive, or

30-transform-cond.patch

2001-02-06 Thread Akim Demaille
A very stupid and mechanic patch, indeed, but it helps me seeing what happens. In this patch I took the freedom of introducing a new syntax: @FOO@ means `to be substituted', while `?FOO?' means to be removed if positive, or to kill the line if negative, and conversely for `?!FOO?'. This patch