Re: expect instability in cpplib for the next week or two

[Zack Weinberg <zack at wolery dot cumb dot org>]

On Tue, Feb 08, 2000 at 10:29:37PM -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> >>>>> "Zack" == Zack Weinberg <zack@wolery.cumb.org> writes:
> 
>     Zack> I'm doing some major rewriting of parts of cpplib.  
> 
> I'm a big supporter of your work.  I'm really looking forward to the
> integrated preprocessor!
> 
>     Zack> means that bugs like -U causing an internal error may not
>     Zack> get fixed very fast.
> 
> But, it would be really good if we can get some of these things fixed
> soon.  The problem is that we've now cut over to cpplib by default.

This is why I posted the message, to remind people of --disable-cpplib.

> I think we should still make it a priority to fix those bugs that
> aren't too obscure -- and -U is one of those.  Even if it's grotesque,
> let's find a temporary work-around for this.

It's actually not bad at all.  I just have to disentangle that fix
from the rest of the mess in my tree right now, and regression-test
it.  I was hoping to get this batch done instead, but as you say, it's
blocking other people.  I'll see what I can do.

zw