According to Ralf Wildenhues on 3/4/2010 1:23 PM: > > Why not let AS_LITERAL_IF retain the semantics that you intend for > AS_LITERAL_IF_W? Would seem logical to me. You can add a new macro > AS_LITERAL_WORD_IF that has the semantics of your AS_LITERAL_IF and use > that whereever appropriate in Autoconf macros. Your call.
Definitely nicer names. Yes, I'll respin along those lines, so that AS_LITERAL_IF doesn't have quite the semantics churn. > > I accidentally applied your AS_LITERAL_IF patch without the AS_BOX > "optimization" and got lots of test failures that way. Yes, the AS_BOX change is directly a result of AS_LITERAL_IF (as written in patch 2/3) no longer accepting whitespace. But I'm not sure why changing AS_LITERAL_IF without changing AS_BOX would lead to testsuite failures; I'll repeat your experiment, and make sure I'm not overlooking something else important. > So the latter > isn't only an optimization, and the former has the potential to break > user code; as AS_BOX wasn't documented until now, users would have to > reimplement it, possibly using the exact code that the old AS_BOX had. > AS_BOX and m4_text_box are not tested in the testsuite BTW. m4_text_box is tested if AS_BOX is tested. And AS_BOX was indirectly "tested" - since autotest/general.m4 uses AS_BOX, all testsuites end up containing expansions of that macro; and the fact that we test autotest means... well, you get it. But yes, I need to add an explicit m4_text_box test to the testsuite. -- Eric Blake [email protected] +1-801-349-2682 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
