autoconf-patches
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 12/12] use a shell function for AC_TYPE_INTx_T


From: Paolo Bonzini
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/12] use a shell function for AC_TYPE_INTx_T
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 19:36:56 +0100
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Macintosh/20080914)

>> +m4_define([_AC_TYPE_INT_BODY],
>> +[  AS_LINENO_PUSH([$[]1])
>> +  AC_CACHE_CHECK([for int$[]2_t], [$[]3],
>> +    [AS_VAR_SET([$[]3], [no])
>> +     for ac_type in 'int$[]2_t' 'int' 'long int' \
> 
> Should that be "int$[]2_t", rather than '', since we want shell expansion of 
> $2 
> to take place in creating $ac_type?

Indeed.

>> +# _AC_TYPE_INT(NBITS)
>> +# -------------------
>> +AC_DEFUN([_AC_TYPE_INT],
> 
> A comment describing this m4 macro would be nice. (And several other macros 
> touched by this patch).

Ok.

>> +[AC_REQUIRE_SHELL_FN([ac_func_c_find_intX_t],
>> +  [AS_FUNCTION_DESCRIBE([ac_func_c_find_intX_t], [LINENO BITS],
>> +    [Finds a signed integer type with width BITS, setting a cache variable
>> +     accordingly.])],
>> +    [$0_BODY])]dnl
> 
> Is this really C specific?  Can C++ or Objective C use it?  In other words, 
> do 
> we want _c_ in the macro name?

I mimicked the cache variable name.  I wonder if we need an
AC_LANG_PUSH/POP pair in the user, in fact.

>>      m4_bmatch([$1], [^\(8\|32\|64\)$],
> 
> Unrelated to the patch, but what happened to 16?

No _UINT16_T needed, apparently...

Paolo




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]