Configuration files (was: Standard compatibility)_(re)

Wed, 9 Apr 1997 14:37:55 +0200

Peter Gerwinski wrote:

> I am already doing this (in a portable way) for the AutoMake mechanism.
> There is an "internal" option `--amtmpfile=cc123456.gpc' which passes
> the name of a file containing the names of the `.o' files to be linked
> to the `gpc' driver program.

Sounds good! Is this a way to use compiler options (like -o, -l, .o files,
.c files) in the source?

> > If every option (except those like $R,$I,$S,$Q(?) that would be the same like
> > BP's) would be at least 2 letters, this would avoid name clashes.
>
> Sounds reasonable.  However I like the (*$W-*) ... (*$W+*) option as
> a quick way to disable/enable warnings locally.  (Sometimes one may
> want to ignore a certain warning.)  To have only (*$no-warnings*)
> ... (*$warnings*) would be a little drawback ...

No objections from me. BP doesn't have a $W option (except Windoze stack
frame for Windoze platform, but I don't care very much about that), and
$W for warnings sounds general enough to justify a one-letter switch.

> > I'm not sure what this has got to do with it. Anyway, I think the biggest
> > problem would be to collect all the options into one record (which might be
> > quite hard if they're scattered among many modules now). Then, pushing and
> > popping would reduce to storing/restoring this record to/from a (LIFO) stack.
>
> Please look at `toplev.c', `gpc-options.h', and `gpc-decl.c' to get an
> overview.

Seems like a lot of work... :-(
-- 
Frank Heckenbach, Erlangen, Germany
heckenb@mi.uni-erlangen.de
Turbo Pascal:   http://www.mi.uni-erlangen.de/~heckenb/programs.htm
Internet links: http://www.mi.uni-erlangen.de/~heckenb/links.htm

Frank Heckenbach (heckenb@mi.uni-erlangen.de)