* Why `lisp' and `shortlisp'
@ 2008-07-03 17:29 Stefan Monnier
2008-07-03 20:00 ` Glenn Morris
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2008-07-03 17:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: emacs-devel
Can someone explain to me why we have both `lisp' and `shortlisp' in
src/Makefile.in? It appears to contain the same list of files, so
I can't understand how it would make sense to sometimes refer to them
via ../lisp and sometimes via ${lispsource}.
Any clue?
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread* Re: Why `lisp' and `shortlisp'
2008-07-03 17:29 Why `lisp' and `shortlisp' Stefan Monnier
@ 2008-07-03 20:00 ` Glenn Morris
2008-07-03 22:39 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Glenn Morris @ 2008-07-03 20:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: emacs-devel
Stefan Monnier wrote:
> Can someone explain to me why we have both `lisp' and `shortlisp' in
> src/Makefile.in? It appears to contain the same list of files, so
> I can't understand how it would make sense to sometimes refer to them
> via ../lisp and sometimes via ${lispsource}.
I wondered about this too. Perhaps:
$lisp specifies the full path for those who build in a different directory.
$shortlisp is needed for the comment above the rule for DOC:
/* We run make-docfile twice because the command line may get too long
on some systems. */
Perhaps $shortlisp is (more likely, was) needed to avoid overflowing
the command-line limit on "some" systems. Generating it from $lisp via
eg sed would have the same problem.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread* Re: Why `lisp' and `shortlisp'
2008-07-03 20:00 ` Glenn Morris
@ 2008-07-03 22:39 ` Stefan Monnier
2008-07-03 22:54 ` Glenn Morris
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2008-07-03 22:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Glenn Morris; +Cc: emacs-devel
>> Can someone explain to me why we have both `lisp' and `shortlisp' in
>> src/Makefile.in? It appears to contain the same list of files, so
>> I can't understand how it would make sense to sometimes refer to them
>> via ../lisp and sometimes via ${lispsource}.
> I wondered about this too. Perhaps:
> $lisp specifies the full path for those who build in a different directory.
> $shortlisp is needed for the comment above the rule for DOC:
> /* We run make-docfile twice because the command line may get too long
> on some systems. */
> Perhaps $shortlisp is (more likely, was) needed to avoid overflowing
> the command-line limit on "some" systems. Generating it from $lisp via
> eg sed would have the same problem.
But if `shortlisp' works, why use `lisp'?
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread* Re: Why `lisp' and `shortlisp'
2008-07-03 22:39 ` Stefan Monnier
@ 2008-07-03 22:54 ` Glenn Morris
2008-07-04 1:13 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Glenn Morris @ 2008-07-03 22:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: emacs-devel
Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> $lisp specifies the full path for those who build in a different directory.
[...]
> But if `shortlisp' works, why use `lisp'?
See line 1 for my guess. I haven't investigated.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Why `lisp' and `shortlisp'
2008-07-03 22:54 ` Glenn Morris
@ 2008-07-04 1:13 ` Stefan Monnier
2008-07-04 1:43 ` Glenn Morris
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2008-07-04 1:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Glenn Morris; +Cc: emacs-devel
>>> $lisp specifies the full path for those who build in a different directory.
> [...]
>> But if `shortlisp' works, why use `lisp'?
> See line 1 for my guess. I haven't investigated.
That would mean that `shortlisp' doesn't work.
So if `shortlisp' always works, why use `lisp'? and if `shortlisp'
doesn't always work, isn't it a bug to use it?
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread* Re: Why `lisp' and `shortlisp'
2008-07-04 1:13 ` Stefan Monnier
@ 2008-07-04 1:43 ` Glenn Morris
2008-07-04 3:40 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Glenn Morris @ 2008-07-04 1:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: emacs-devel
Stefan Monnier wrote:
> That would mean that `shortlisp' doesn't work.
Unless it works well enough for the context of make-docfile, which is
the only place that uses it. Looks like the -d option of make-docfile
is what enables it to work.
I'm only guessing, it's probably all due to...
> So if `shortlisp' always works, why use `lisp'? and if `shortlisp'
> doesn't always work, isn't it a bug to use it?
...hysterical raisins.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-07-04 3:40 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-07-03 17:29 Why `lisp' and `shortlisp' Stefan Monnier
2008-07-03 20:00 ` Glenn Morris
2008-07-03 22:39 ` Stefan Monnier
2008-07-03 22:54 ` Glenn Morris
2008-07-04 1:13 ` Stefan Monnier
2008-07-04 1:43 ` Glenn Morris
2008-07-04 3:40 ` Stefan Monnier
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).