Bryan C. Warnock:
# Is there any reason why we couldn't break up configure (when
# it comes into
# being) into chunks?
#
# The last 5.7.2 grab I have puts the current one at 17.5 Klines. It's
# weighty, a beast to maintain, and a beast to keep running
# through (should
# something break
On Friday 07 December 2001 03:32 am, Brent Dax wrote:
I have no idea how many times this has been suggested. :^)
Well, then one more is a relatively small burden to bear. ;-)
Seriously, the only problem I can see with it is that the modules will
have to be run in a specific order. If you
On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
On Friday 07 December 2001 03:32 am, Brent Dax wrote:
I have no idea how many times this has been suggested. :^)
Dependency-ish rules, a la make. Maybe even tied into the actual build
itself. I don't think getting them to run in the right
On Friday 07 December 2001 08:43 am, Andy Dougherty wrote:
Funny you should mention that, because Perl's Configure does things in
order determined by 'Dependency-ish rules, a la make'. Configure is
indeed built in just the way you suggest.
Except, of course, for being one big honking file.
On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
On Friday 07 December 2001 08:43 am, Andy Dougherty wrote:
Funny you should mention that, because Perl's Configure does things in
order determined by 'Dependency-ish rules, a la make'. Configure is
indeed built in just the way you suggest.
On Friday 07 December 2001 09:18 am, Andy Dougherty wrote:
Except, of course, for being one big honking file.
That's a mere implementation detail :-). (Though one that's admittedly
quite intimidating!) It isn't one big file until the very very end step.
There's no reason it couldn't be a
On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
On Friday 07 December 2001 09:18 am, Andy Dougherty wrote:
The key idea is that the pumpkin holder runs 'make' ONCE to determine the
dependencies and record the proper order to run the units in a file.
End-users don't have to redetermine that
Piers Cawley writes:
I got some mail from a publisher off the back of my 'Not Just for
Damians' article asking if I'd like to write a perl 6 book for them.
Must reply really.
Sure, I'd be glad to write about perl 6. Do you also want to know
the next Lotto numbers, who'll win the Grand
Nathan Torkington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Piers Cawley writes:
I got some mail from a publisher off the back of my 'Not Just for
Damians' article asking if I'd like to write a perl 6 book for them.
Must reply really.
Sure, I'd be glad to write about perl 6. Do you also want to know
the
I will not post these until status changes in order not to clutter the list.
Assume succes on HP-UX 11.00 until a report proves different.
Automated smoke report for patch Dec 6 20:00:01 2001 UTC
v0.02 on hpux - 11.00 using cc version B.11.11.02
O = OK
F = Failure(s), extended
On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Andy Dougherty wrote:
On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
On Friday 07 December 2001 08:43 am, Andy Dougherty wrote:
Funny you should mention that, because Perl's Configure does things in
order determined by 'Dependency-ish rules, a la make'. Configure is
On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 02:08:45PM -0500, Gregor N. Purdy wrote:
I'd still like to check in an updated queens.pasm, although, I'd be
happy to wait while this problem is fixed since there aren't other
tests of the rotate op.
I think Jako is confused about what 'rotate' rotates - we now have a
Simon --
I'd still like to check in an updated queens.pasm, although, I'd be
happy to wait while this problem is fixed since there aren't other
tests of the rotate op.
I think Jako is confused about what 'rotate' rotates - we now have a
control stack and a generic stack. 'save',
On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 03:39:26PM -0500, Gregor N. Purdy wrote:
I'll overlay queens.pasm with a newly generated one.
Works beautifully, thanks.
--
Some people claim that the UNIX learning curve is steep, but at least you
only have to climb it once.
14 matches
Mail list logo
