On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:48 PM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> This is not a problem, because I will be implementing in Haskell a system > to manipulate Python code. Thus managing the python code that manages the C > code will become a far easier task :-) > Where does m4 fit in? And hopefully Perl. Anything that uses _both_ m4 and another language to manipulate a third language is bound to be good. > > You are perfectly happy using a really crappy system for manipulating C > code (CPP) but fear that a better system would be impossible to get right? > What if I proposed just one tweak to CPP to make PETSc source code better, > would you consider that? > I would consider it based on the value of that tweak, acknowledging that changing CPP in any way presents a severe workflow contortion. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20130207/134b5485/attachment-0001.html>
