Re: [PATCH 2/4] Refactor window-system configuration

[Dan Nicolaescu <dann@gnu.org>]

Daniel Colascione <dancol@dancol.org> writes:

> On 12/29/11 2:43 PM, Dan Nicolaescu wrote:
>> Daniel Colascione <dancol@dancol.org> writes:
>> 
>>> On 12/29/11 2:21 PM, Dan Nicolaescu wrote:
>>>> We don't use something like "#include TERM_HEADER" in any other place,
>>>> it you really want to consolidate this stuff, creating a new header
>>>> file to include seems better.
>>>
>>> There's a first time for everything, and besides: other projects have
>> 
>> Why add another wrinkle when we have perfectly working solutions already? 
>
> We don't have a working solution. We have a mess, and we're trying to
> clean it up. Sure, we don't have header constants right now, but we
> don't have any pure-dispatch headers either.
>
> I suppose we disagree on what counts as a wrinkle.  In my mind, it's
> simpler for config.h to just tell code what header to include than to
> create (and maintain) a header file that consists solely of ifdefs and
> more includes.

There's a lot more emacs contributors that are fluent in C than
contributors fluent with autoconf.  Why not cater to the majority?