On Saturday 03 September 2011, Peter Rosin wrote:
> Hi Stefano,
>
> Den 2011-09-03 09:41 skrev Stefano Lattarini:
> > On Saturday 03 September 2011, Peter Rosin wrote:
> >>
> >> [BIG SNIP]
> >>
> >> I don't think cccl is the future, I see it as the past. It's
> >> simply not needed when the needed bits are already in 'compile'.
> >>
> >> It's a bit sad to see all the effort going into writing private
> >> scripts wrapping cl into something that looks like gcc, when the
> >> effort could be spent making autotools just work instead.
> >>
> > For what concerns this: are you willing to re-submit your patch
> > series about AM_PROG_AR to automake-patches? I will try hard to
> > look into it, if you are willing to do the required testing and
> > to patiently explain to me the details I won't undertand (and
> > be warned that there will probably be many of them, since I'm a
> > total Windows noob).
> >
> > Oh, also, before doing that, could you please merge the 'maint'
> > branch into the 'msvc' branch? Or I can do that for you if you
> > prefer (but then you'll have to double-check that the merge has
> > been really successfull).
>
> There was that little disagreement over how win32 portability
> warnings should be handled. That should perhaps be resolved first?
>
My opinion today is: let those warnings be implied by `-Wall' and
`-Wportability', and introduce a new warnings category ("msvc", or
"win32", or "windows", or ... <your suggetion here>) so that a user
not interested in them can add `-Wno-msvc' to AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS and
live happily.
Regards,
Stefano
