On 08/06/2017 02:59 PM, David Grayson wrote:
> I would agree with Martin; I think it's a very good practice for
> source files to have an error or not define a function instead of
> defining a function that can't possibly work and letting the build
> proceed with a broken function.  Compiler and linker errors are much
> easier to figure out than segmentation faults.
> 
> If you try to do it with autoconf, it's easy for the autoconf layer to
> get out of sync with the rest of the source code, or for someone to
> decide they want to use their own build system instead of the autoconf
> layer.  And it won't help very much when porting to a new architecture
> like Martin said.
> 
> --David
> 

The source file could be better split so you don't need to read all of
it, and you don't need any preprocessor directives sprinkled about, eg
math/asm/arm, math/common, math/asm/x86.

As for autoconf, it's here to stay.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Mingw-w64-public mailing list
Mingw-w64-public@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public

Reply via email to