Re: pre-processing

[Sam S. <sd...@gn...>]

> * Daniel Jour <qna...@tz...> [2016-08-30 18:10:12 +0200]:
>
>> * gctrigger is necessary for GCSAFETY -- keep it!
>
> Hm ... what about this:
>
> MAYGC(void, my_function_name, type1, param1, type2, param2) {
>   // code
> }

We already have LISPFUN which looks like that, so, I guess, it will be
okay - even though I would _much_ prefer the standard C syntax.

> Getting rid of all preprocessing would be nice because then we could
> use the implicit rules and dependency tracking of automake.

C module files are pre-processed, so I don't think pre-processing can go
away entirely.

>> * txt2c is for doc processing, I think we should move away from it
>
> Do I understand correctly that txt2c is mostly used to enable or
> disable parts of the docs depending on the configuration, as well as
> putting some data about the build and configuration into the docs
> (like whether it uses trivialmap memory or not)?

yes, exactly.

> This is what AC_CONFIG_FILES and its variable substitution is IMO for,
> though I'm not sure if it can replace txt2c completely (and in an
> elegant and easy to use way).

I don't think this is feasible or convenient.

>>  (what do other projects use?)

This is the key question.

txt2c processes these files:

* _clisp.c
https://sourceforge.net/p/clisp/mailman/message/23484750/
(also explained in its header)
looks like double pre-processing is inevitable.

* README*
--- should have no platform-dependent parts.

* man pages clisp.1, clisp.html &c
--- what do other projects use? e.g., does Emacs or sbcl or perl or
    python man pages differ on different platforms?


-- 
Sam Steingold (http://sds.podval.org/) on darwin Ns 10.3.1404
http://www.childpsy.net/ http://iris.org.il http://www.dhimmitude.org
http://truepeace.org http://ffii.org http://thereligionofpeace.com
Takeoffs are optional.  Landings are mandatory.