Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from March 2003
At 11:40 PM -0800 3/13/03, Gurusamy Sarathy wrote:
>On Fri, 14 Mar 2003 01:07:56 CST, "Craig A. Berry" wrote:
>>You may be right, but after an hour or two I gave up trying to figure
>>out what the comments in config_h.SH and the docs in Porting/Glossary
>>were trying to tell me and went with what I thought Configure was
> >actually doing.
>Porting/Glossary is quite clear, IMO:
<actual definitions snipped>
>Note that both sig_num and sig_num_init have the "terminated with a 0".
Right, but despite what Porting/Glossary says, platforms that use
Configure do not terminate either sig_num or sig_name with 0. They
still don't as of perl@18978 and perhaps never did. In a way it
makes sense that they wouldn't if these variables are (as I infer)
for use within Perl where it's easy to know which element in an array
is the last. sig_num_init and sig_name_init, on the other hand, are
apparently for the creation of C macros, which may in turn be used to
declare arrays, and it's nice to have a sanity check at the end of
the array even if you have sig_size to go by. If sig_size is used
correctly and exclusively for determining how many signals you have,
then the presence or absence of the final 0 will never be noticed in
either C or Perl.
Following that rationale, and in light of the long-standing practice
of Configure-based platforms and a new test that enforced that
practice, I went with the practice rather than with Porting/Glossary.
But I'm happy to be steered in the direction of changing
configure.com and Configure to do what Porting/Glossary says. If
that's the consensus, the attached patch implements the change (yikes
-- my first dip into awk).
--
________________________________________
Craig A. Berry
mailto:craigberry@mac.com
"... getting out of a sonnet is much more
difficult than getting in."
Brad Leithauser
Thread Previous