Discussion about merging Go frontend
Ralf Wildenhues
Ralf.Wildenhues@gmx.de
Wed Nov 3 06:09:00 GMT 2010
* Dave Korn wrote on Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 11:44:49PM CET:
> On 02/11/2010 15:06, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> > Dave Korn writes:
> >
> >> -AC_SUBST(LTO_FORMAT)
> >> +AC_SUBST(SYM_STYLE)
> >
> > It would seem more natural to use AC_DEFINE here. Any reason not to do
> > that?
>
> It seems a bit much overkill. There's only a single -D right now, so why
> not pass it straight through? With AC_DEFINE I'd still have to import @DEFS@
> into the makefile, just to get HAVE_CONFIG_H available at build time, and then
> add a config.h with a single #define in it. If there were several symbols to
> define, or if there was already an AC_CONFIG_HEADER, I'd do it, but there
> isn't yet, so why haul all that extra weight?
FWIW, you don't need an AC_CONFIG_HEADER. If you don't have one, @DEFS@
will expand to all the defines defined by AC_DEFINE.
Cheers,
Ralf
More information about the Gcc-patches
mailing list