From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id TAA21299; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:33:40 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA20886 for ; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:33:38 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from chopin.ai.univie.ac.at (chopin.ai.univie.ac.at [131.130.174.170]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f83HXbT20698 for ; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:33:38 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from markus@localhost) by chopin.ai.univie.ac.at (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) id SAA08542; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 18:36:46 +0200 Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 18:36:46 +0200 From: Markus Mottl To: Patrick M Doane Cc: OCAML Subject: Re: [Caml-list] canonical camlp4-suffix? Message-ID: <20010903183646.B8034@chopin.ai.univie.ac.at> References: <20010903175840.A8034@chopin.ai.univie.ac.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from patrick@watson.org on Mon, Sep 03, 2001 at 12:06:53 -0400 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Mon, 03 Sep 2001, Patrick M Doane wrote: > I'm curious - are you going to allow each file to be compiled with > its own set of camlp4 preprocessors or will it be one set for the > whole project? It is always possible for users to provide specific 'make'-rules for specific files, e.g. when they want to preprocess their OCaml-files in funny ways. So I don't think it would be a good idea to make things this complicated. The main problem is that files containing quotations or syntax extensions may themselves require preprocessing (e.g. the latter always need this). It's impossible for 'make' to figure out how to proceed in the general case. Therefore, I'll only support "first-order" preprocessing with additional preprocessing flags as required for syntax extensions. Furthermore, it would be also quite complicated if I supported implementations of quotations / syntax extensions that spread over several modules. This would require dependency analysis again. In such difficult cases the user would be better advised to compile these extensions in a separate directory and just pass the resulting library to camlp4 via a flag variable. I think this scheme should be good enough for most cases. Most people won't require much more than a couple of quotation files, but don't want to fiddle around with command line parameters. Thus, there will only be one list containing all modules that implement quotations or syntax extensions. They will be compiled before all other modules and passed to the preprocessor during compilation of the source files that use the extensions. > I've seen .mlp sometimes... Ok, '.mlp' and '.mlip' would be fine for me, too. Any objections? Regards, Markus Mottl -- Markus Mottl markus@oefai.at Austrian Research Institute for Artificial Intelligence http://www.oefai.at/~markus ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr