On Sep 18, 2007, at 12:29 AM, Allison Randal wrote:
For perspective, keep in mind that we will eventually be
refactoring the Perl 5-based configure system anyway, to remove the
dependency on an old install of Perl 5. So, the behavior of the
current prototype configuration system is more
On Sep 18, 2007, at 12:29 AM, Allison Randal wrote:
I would like to have the option of making some configuration
failures fatal. The lack of a working C compiler is a good example,
but I imagine we will find others as we go along.
I would also like the option of telling Configure to
I am not sure what to quote so let me reply on a clean page.
I would like to see invalid configuration options and values as being always
fatal. They indicate some kind of user error, a typo or similar that would
probably cause trouble to the Parrot developer as well as the Parrot user.
In order
[This is long and in parts is something of a rant. You have been
forewarned!]
The current Parrot configuration system is essentially a harness.
P::C::runsteps() will go from one step to the next regardless of whether
the first step completes successfully. So critical failures don't cause
On Monday 17 September 2007 19:44:10 James E Keenan wrote:
The current system consists of 58 separate programs which vary markedly
in terms of purpose and complexity. The only things they share in
common are (a) that they are required to have a $description and a sub
runstep() to fit into
For perspective, keep in mind that we will eventually be refactoring the
Perl 5-based configure system anyway, to remove the dependency on an old
install of Perl 5. So, the behavior of the current prototype
configuration system is more important than the internal structure of
the code.
James
