This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Preprocess script
- From: Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at>
- To: Andrea 'fwyzard' Bocci <fwyzard at inwind dot it>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 22:40:58 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: Preprocess script
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org><email@example.com><firstname.lastname@example.org><email@example.com><firstname.lastname@example.org>
On Mon, 19 May 2003, Andrea 'fwyzard' Bocci wrote:
> I've modified the proprocess script with the XHTML validation procedures.
> Now it supports 3 validation engins: 2 webbased (W3C e WDG) and a local
> validator (I use alocal copy of the WDG validator).
> I've tried to keep everything as simple as possible, adding some desciption
> to all the functions and a help output.
Can we avoid duplicating the comments at the top and the help output?
Something similar to contrib/gcc_update would be nice (though I'm not
a sed guru, but if you ask Alexandre Oliva nicely <g>).
Also I noticed that you seem to have undone some change to the script
I made some time ago; would you mind checking that? (This is why a diff
is better in general.)
Finally, we should keep this a /bin/sh script and not depend on bash,
for portability reasons and so that others (developers at home,...)
can easily use the script as well.
> Tell me your opinions on this one, if you like it or if you'd rather have
> any changes to it.
I like it, but do you see any chance of breaking the changes into, say,
three, smaller, independent hunks? This is a very critical script, and
I'm very worried not to break anything.
Thanks a lot for your efforts on that!
PS: If you agree, I could start by committing the three .png-s to CVS,
as http://gcc.gnu.org/validate-ok.png, validate-error.png, and
validate-empty.png or similar?
Gerald "Jerry" email@example.com http://www.pfeifer.com/gerald/