Hello, On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 02:37:06PM +0200, Bruno Haible wrote: > Stepan Kasal wrote: > > But in the basic case, when only the implementation is fixed and no > > header is needed, I see no advantage in adding a redundant call to > > AC_LIBSOURCES. > > The advantage is simplicity and consistency.
I thought you would object... ;-) It's only a matter of style and preferrence, no big deal. > Your approach is even worse: It forces the maintainer to look or grep > for AC_LIBOBJ invocations in the autoconf macros. And not only in the > package's *.m4 files, but also in autoconf's and automake's own *.m4 files! > It opens the door to problems that will appear with one version of autoconf > and not with another... > > Too much magic -> implies -> too much complexity when debugging. The magic is already there: AC_LIBOBJ calls AC_LIBSOURCE since 2.50 when it was introduced. I don't see any chance to remove it now. This magic can complicate debugging, yes. Even though gnulib uses the redundant style, the magic is still hidden behind, ready to bite you! OK, forget about it. Stepan _______________________________________________ bug-gnulib mailing list bug-gnulib@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnulib
