[Omake] Re: Should we provide AC_MSG_* and other autoconf-style functions?

[David Kågedal]

Nathaniel Gray <n8gray at caltech.edu> writes:

> On Feb 14, 2007, at 3:21 PM, Aleksey Nogin wrote:
>
>> I am thinking that we should provide more helper functions in the
>> lib/configure - perhaps making it easier for people to migrate off
>> autoconf in the same way we are trying to make it easier for people
>> to migrate off make.
>>
>> So I am wondering - would it be reasonable to try to provide
>> autoconf-style functions, perhaps even with autoconf-style names?
>>
>> My first initial small step is to introduce the AC_MSG_* functions
>> similar to autoconf's and change our own static. sections to use
>> them in a consistent manner in place of ad-hoc print/println
>> combinations.
>>
>> A preliminary patch is attached.
>>
>> What would you guys think about this?
>
> I like the idea of more configuration functions, but I'm not so hot
> on the autoconf-style names.  Perhaps you could put them in an
> autoconf.om compatibility module?

Agreed.  I don't think anyone not porting from autoconf should ever
have to see those names.

-- 
David Kågedal