Re: autoconf help?

["Keith Lucas" <klucas@atlan-tech.com>]

>It makes sense, but only if you accept his preconditions. In particular the
>example project's directory layout:
>
>Project/
>  Makefile
>  module1/
>    Makefile
>    main.c
>  module2/
>    Makefile
>    parse.c
>    parse.h

That's the sort of thing I do though :-)

>This in itself isn't bad, but the real point (on which also his entire
>argumentation is based) is that parse.h is included by (obviously) parse.c
>*and* by main.c
>In this situation the above directory layout is complete crap. Something
>like this would solve the problem:

I try and keep .C and .Hs together, so I don't lose them.

Actually, my boilerplate and build systems generate a .doc and a .errs as well
for each .o, so it kind of makes sense to keep it all together.

>Although this layout is "bigger" than the first one, it imposes a good deal
>less problems on the build system, simply because all headers that are
>needed by more than 1 module are in a central place.

Yeah. I can kind of see the point of that. I dunno, the essay kind of made sense
in the way I work. I dint really think about the alternate arrangement while I
was reading it.

YMMV is the conclusion I guess.




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: linuxgames-unsubscribe@sunsite.auc.dk
For additional commands, e-mail: linuxgames-help@sunsite.auc.dk