On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, chromatic wrote:
> On Tuesday 16 February 2010 at 18:50, Andy Dougherty wrote:
>
> > I'm afraid that I'm unlikely to have any opportunity to do anything
> > useful with this for quite a while, so go with whatever makes sense to
> > you.
>
> Ultimately we want cleanliness of course,
For the rm_flags branch, it's currently not an issue of cleanliness. It
simply doesn't build with anything other than gcc[*] (and probably not
with gcc -O3 on amd64/Linux). There were things in the old CFLAGS
mechanism which need to somehow be accomodated in the new order. I believe
Coke is well aware of these and working on them, but hasn't had time to
finish them yet.
More broadly, the old CFLAGS way was indeed incredibly roundabout and
clunky; the new way forward is potentially both simpler and more flexible.
--
Andy Dougherty [email protected]
_______________________________________________
http://lists.parrot.org/mailman/listinfo/parrot-dev
