Re: cpp replacement

[Jeffrey A Law <law at hurl dot cygnus dot com>]

  In message <199902010324.WAA23294@blastula.phys.columbia.edu>you write:
  > On Sun, 31 Jan 1999 12:45:16 -0700, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
  > >
  > >When y'all have settled on the script, can you send a patch which includes
  >  the
  > >cpp script and the Makefile.in changes to get the script installed?
  > >
  > >We actually wanted to include this kind of script in egcs-1.1, but it fell
  > >through the cracks.
  > 
  > Here's my patch.  It should work correctly on all supported Unixes,
  > but I doubt it works on cygwin/mingwin/djgpp.  Shouldn't be too hard
  > to fix, just gotta find someone who knows how you get shell scripts to
  > be executable under DOS.
  > 
  > zw
  > 
  > 1999-01-31 22:22 -0500  Zack Weinberg  <zack@rabi.columbia.edu>
  > 
  > 	* cpp.in: New file.
  > 	* Makefile.in (install-driver): Also install cpp wrapper in
  > 	$(bindir). 
  > 	(xcpp): New target.
I think I like HJ's old cpp patch better.  It seems a lot more complete for
the kinds of problems we're trying to address.

Specifically it handles installing cpp in a second location, which helps with
the "/lib/cpp" problem (lots of stuff hard-codes /lib/cpp :(

It also handles install/uninstall better (we really ought to fix uninstall
one day, several folks have asked about it).

HJ's patch has got a few minor problems, but nothing I shouldn't be able
to resolve on the fly.

I do have one question, why does your patch bother with argument processing?
cpp's interface has always been:  cpp [switches] [infile] [outfile]
where infile and outfile default to stdin/stdout automatically.  Does gcc -E
not handle input on stdin or something like that?

Thanks,
jeff