It was thus said that the Great Hisham once stated:
> On 1 May 2013 19:23, Philipp Janda <siffie...@gmx.net> wrote:
> > Btw., I believe compiler support for C99 should be some form of
> > (external?) dependency (maybe like the magic "lua" in the dependencies
> > table), so that Visual C++ users get a more informative error message
> > why some module wouldn't build for them.
> >
> > dependencies = {
> > "lua ~> 5.1",
> > "c >= 99", --> maybe like this? one could even do
> > -- "c == gnu99" --> for compiler specific modules, but IMHO
> > this is going too far ...
> > }
> >
> > An alternative (or maybe an additional feature) would be some form of
> > compiler overrides like the current platform overrides, but I think a
> > clear message what went wrong is more difficult in this case.
>
> Those are interesting ideas. Specifying the language variant in a
> high-level/compiler-independent would be best, but some sort of
> compiler overrides could be useful too. We kinda do that already by
> having "mingw32" as a platform type...
I like the idea of " c >= 99" since it parallels the Lua dependency, and
can be used to change the compiler options.
-spc
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introducing AppDynamics Lite, a free troubleshooting tool for Java/.NET
Get 100% visibility into your production application - at no cost.
Code-level diagnostics for performance bottlenecks with <2% overhead
Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_ap1
_______________________________________________
Luarocks-developers mailing list
Luarocks-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/luarocks-developers
