| Re: [AD] Documentation system 2009 |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
On January 10, 2009, Evert Glebbeek wrote:
> On 10-Jan-09, at 10:03 AM, Peter Wang wrote:
> > Patch attached. The scripts are written in shell (they'd be trivial
> > to
> > rewrite, even in C). Natural Docs have been extracted but not
> > reformatted.
> > The CMake build will generate HTML, man and info documents (if
> > enabled).
> >
> > I'll get some more opinions before committing.
>
> Seems fine to me!
> As to what language they should be written in: he important things is
> that it works and is maintainable. Shellscripts are easy to use to set
> things up but become annoying to maintain (in my experience).
> I know Python and I hate it with a passion (unfortunately I have no
> choice but to use it for some work related projects). I know and love
> Perl and if properly written, you'd hardly know it wasn't C (I've
> copy&pasted code between C and Perl on a few occasions, only
> difference was having to stick $ in front of a variable name in Perl).
> So I think it's clear there's not going to be any one solution that
> everyone would be happy with, ruling out both. This is even before we
> address Windows.
> So I like the suggestion of using C (or C++) to do this. I would also
> have a slight preference for C over C++, but whoever codes it up gets
> to decide, I guess.
I think C/C++ wins out. And the path.c stuff should make the file handling
somewhat less annoying in C than it is in C or C++ normally. If it doesn't,
well then tell me what to fix ;D
> Evert
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>--- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
> It is the best place to buy or sell services for
> just about anything Open Source.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/Xq1LFB
--
Thomas Fjellstrom
tfjellstrom@xxxxxxxxxx