Message-ID:	<B0FEA00E82A7D1118BFB00A0CC990278213296@ARGON>
From:	Michel de Ruiter <Michel AT smr DOT nl>
To:	"'Eli Zaretskii'" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Cc:	"'DJGPP workers'" <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	RE: v2.03: wrapping up
Date:	Mon, 3 May 1999 16:34:00 +0200
X-Mailer:	Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

> ?default? was chosen because `?' cannot appear in file names.
>  I could use other characters, like `*' or `"' (the double quote),
> but they didn't seem more attractive.  However, if people like them
> better, changing that is simple.

? is fine IMHO.

> > so the following would be readable:
> > /dev/env/C_INCLUDE_PATH{/dev/env/DJDIR{/djgpp}}/include
> {} is not a good idea as it is special to Bash and therefore
> it would be difficult to drag such a name through configure
> scripts (I'm thinking about "./configure --prefix=/dev/env/DJDIR"

True. Also, {} can appear in file names IIRC.

> etc.); [] and () can appear in file names (rare, I know, but
> possible).  Other things I considered involved two or more
> characters, like ?: etc.; but this complicates the code, so I've
> chosen not to use them.

I agree. Too bad recursive definitions will not be too readable.

> > Would it be a good idea to add the default possibility to the
> > DJGPP.ENV syntax somehow?
> If a default is part of the feature, why do you need something
> special for DJGPP.ENV?

Well, I don't need it, but then there will be at least some
recurring syntax. Never mind.
Most of the DJGPP.ENV file will be needless on the long run.

> The DJGPP.ENV file itself won't be found anyway, unless $DJDGPP
> is set.

You mean $DJGPP? But of course.

Groente, Michel.

- Raw text -