On Tuesday 08 November 2005 17:53, Javier Martinez wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> > > 1. Macro's can never extend or change the real functionality /
> > > performance of the compiler. This would imply that a macro-machine
> > > should always or best be implemented as a pre-processor.
> >
> > I agree, but while on unix-like systems a pre-processor is (almost)
> > always present, on other systems (windows), it is not. I'm not interested
> > in windows personally, but someone else could be, and maybe they don't
> > want to install a third-party program.
>
> Marco, you hit in the bulls eye. Ask in the jallist how many of them
> have a C compiler to build latest JAL sources ....
>
> ... and now think that we're asking them to have a C preprocessor to
> daily work with JAL.

Yes, I understand.

> As a starting position (just begin to do something), we can place
> your code as a patch of latest sources. If I recall well, SF.net have a
> special entry for this purposes.

This sounds great! Thanks.

In the meantime I'll try to come to a more integrated solution.
I'll keep you posted.

Cheers,
Marco

--
Marco Pantaleoni

elastiC language developer
http://www.elasticworld.org