guile-doc-snarf replaced in the Makefile for scwm

guile-doc-snarf replaced in the Makefile for scwm

[P Pareit]

Hey,

Sinds newer versions of guile do not provide guile-doc-snarf anymore and after 
the comments in guile-user I came up with the following solution:

This is the offending code in the original makefile:

.c.x:
	guile-doc-snarf $< $(DEFS) $(INCLUDES) $(CPPFLAGS) $(CFLAGS) $< > $@ \
	|| { rm $@; false; }
.cc.x:
	guile-doc-snarf $< $(DEFS) $(INCLUDES) $(CPPFLAGS) $(CFLAGS) $< > $@ \
	|| { rm $@; false; }
.c.doc:
	guile-doc-snarf $< $(DEFS) $(INCLUDES) $(CPPFLAGS) $(CFLAGS) $< > /dev/null \
        || { rm $@; false; }

An this is what I changed it to:

.c.x:
	guile-snarf $< $(DEFS) $(INCLUDES) $(CPPFLAGS) $(CFLAGS) $< > $@ \
	|| { rm $@; false; }
.cc.x:
	guile-snarf $< $(DEFS) $(INCLUDES) $(CPPFLAGS) $(CFLAGS) $< > $@ \
	|| { rm $@; false; }

Rational:

The documentation says to use guile-snarf to generate the .x files that gets 
included in the initializing functions.
This is because guile-doc-snarf used to first generate the documentation and 
then called guile-snarf, and so did the work of guile-snarf (see node Doc 
Snarfing in info).
For the .c.doc rule I was suggested to use guile-tools c2doc, but my 
installation did not include c2doc and I also did not find documentation for 
it. And the rule does not get used so I throw it out.

I also think it is not needed to remove the generated files if guile-snarf 
fails as guile-snarf will do when given file to output , so I could even 
change this to:

.c.x:
	guile-snarf $< -o $@ $(DEFS) $(INCLUDES) $(CPPFLAGS) $(CFLAGS) $<
.cc.x:
	guile-snarf $< -o $@ $(DEFS) $(INCLUDES) $(CPPFLAGS) $(CFLAGS) $<

If someone could confirm I'm right? This way I can start changing autogen.sh 
for scwm and send in a patch.

pieter;




_______________________________________________
Guile-user mailing list
Guile-user@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user

Re: guile-doc-snarf replaced in the Makefile for scwm

[Marius Vollmer]

P Pareit <pieter.pareit@planetinternet.be> writes:

> The documentation says to use guile-snarf to generate the .x files
> that gets included in the initializing functions.

That is correct.

> For the .c.doc rule I was suggested to use guile-tools c2doc, but my
> installation did not include c2doc and I also did not find
> documentation for it. And the rule does not get used so I throw it
> out.

So Scwm doesn't make any use of .doc files?

> I also think it is not needed to remove the generated files if
> guile-snarf fails as guile-snarf will do when given file to output ,
> so I could even change this to:

The "-o OUTPUT" option needs to come before the input file, like so:

.c.x:
	guile-snarf -o $@ $< $(DEFS) $(INCLUDES) $(CPPFLAGS) $(CFLAGS)
.cc.x:
	guile-snarf -o $@ $< $(DEFS) $(INCLUDES) $(CPPFLAGS) $(CFLAGS)

This variant will work with both 1.6.0 and the unofficial 1.4.x
series, I think.  Putting "$<" at the very end will only work with
1.6.0 (I think).

> If someone could confirm I'm right? This way I can start changing
> autogen.sh for scwm and send in a patch.

From the Guile point of view, you are right.  When Scwm needs the .doc
files, we need to find a solution for that as well.  (We need to find
a solution anyway and probably "c2doc" is it.)

-- 
GPG: D5D4E405 - 2F9B BCCC 8527 692A 04E3  331E FAF8 226A D5D4 E405


_______________________________________________
Guile-user mailing list
Guile-user@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user

guile-mysql

[Sergey Dolin]

  http://isc.uu.ru/~dsa/guile/mysql.html

-- 
Sergey           29 January, Wednesday 16:33(YEKT +0500)
Gnus v5.9(GNU/Emacs 21.2)*Debian GNU/Linux woody*Fvwm-2.4


_______________________________________________
Guile-user mailing list
Guile-user@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user