Re: no-c++.m4: bug fix: egrep: repetition-operator operand invalid

Sam Steingold wrote: > On Darwin (Mac OS) the gt_NO_CXX test fails because "Is g++" is not a > valid repetition-operator operand. > > The attached patch fixes the problem. Thanks. There is also another problem in this macro: Since a preprocessor is allowed to insert additional spaces, it may tran

Re: no-c++

Paolo Bonzini writes: >> Is there a wide class of projects or operating systems that recommends >> or suggests use of CC=c++ that I've missed? I'm trying to understand >> the origins of the CC=c++ notion. Learning that may help me understand >> the bigger picture. > > For example, when a projec

Re: no-c++

Is there a wide class of projects or operating systems that recommends or suggests use of CC=c++ that I've missed? I'm trying to understand the origins of the CC=c++ notion. Learning that may help me understand the bigger picture. For example, when a project is considering switching from C t

Re: no-c++

On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Simon Josefsson wrote: > Sam Steingold writes: > >> Some packages are compilable with both C (production) and C++ (extra >> compilation time type checking and run-time verification for >> debugging). >> when such a package uses code from gnulib, it wants to compil

Re: no-c++

Sam Steingold writes: > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Simon Josefsson wrote: >> Bruno Haible writes: >> >>> Should the 'regex' module (and possibly other modules which require C >>> syntax) depend on the 'no-c++' module? We can open a poll on it. >> >> I don't understand the rationale for the

Re: no-c++

On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Simon Josefsson wrote: > Bruno Haible writes: > >> Should the 'regex' module (and possibly other modules which require C >> syntax) depend on the 'no-c++' module? We can open a poll on it. > > I don't understand the rationale for the no-c++ module, let alone making

Re: no-c++

Bruno Haible writes: > Should the 'regex' module (and possibly other modules which require C > syntax) depend on the 'no-c++' module? We can open a poll on it. I don't understand the rationale for the no-c++ module, let alone making any other modules depend on it. What is the issue with compili

Re: no-c++

Sam Steingold wrote in : > my suggestion eliminates two expensive steps: > > now: > > import the non-C++ module > regenerate all autoconf files > try to compile with c++, fail > import no-c++ > regenerate all autoconf files > add

Re: no-c++

> * Bruno Haible [2009-08-08 11:47:01 +0200]: > > Sam Steingold wrote: >> modules which cannot be compiled with c++ (regex, gettimeofday) should depend >> on no-c++ > > This cannot be implemented as you wish. The ability to compile in C mode when > CC="g++" is done through a variable NO_CXX that h

Re: no-c++

Sam Steingold wrote: > modules which cannot be compiled with c++ (regex, gettimeofday) should depend > on no-c++ This cannot be implemented as you wish. The ability to compile in C mode when CC="g++" is done through a variable NO_CXX that has to be added to the compiler flags. But modifying compil