Re: Windows support

[Valeriy E. Ushakov]

On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 06:42:39 +0100, James Mansion wrote:

> >>What was most upsetting to me really was how hard it was to see
> >>where and how the command line to execute was being built.
> >
> >Why do you need to know how the argument to system() is built internally?
> 
> Because the command to execute is wrapped in a pipeline of commands
> that are *NIX-specific.  The prooblem is wrapping around the supplied
> text in 'pipe'.

Oh, it's the first time in this thread you mention "pipe".


> If I do pipe {"dir"} the command as built is:
> 
>       cat louti1 | dir | prg2lout -r -lC -o lout1 -elout.err
[...]
> If someone could enlighten me about how/where the command is formed, I'd
> be really grateful.

In include/cprintf

  def @Filter
  {
      # ...

      pipe @Case {
          "" @Yield {
              "prg2lout -r -lC" wantblanknumbered wantnumbered
              address@hidden address@hidden address@hidden
              address@hidden address@hidden
          }
          else @Yield {
              "cat" @FilterIn "|" pipe "|"
              "prg2lout -r -lC" wantblanknumbered wantnumbered
              address@hidden address@hidden
              address@hidden address@hidden
          }
      }


> Call me old-fashioned, but I thought it should be straightforward to fix
> that with an ifdef that would work on Windows and offer a contribution.
> 
> But it did not prove straightforward to work backwards from FilterExecute,
> which (obviously) is in z40.c.

You are funny :).  It's like you try to fix a shell script, but you
don't tell anyone what your problem actually is and instead you
complain about shell sources.  Call me old-fashioned, but perhaps
clearly stating the problem and refraining from passive-agressive
undertones might actually prove to be more productive.


> >>I can't really find a polite way to describe the structure of it -
> >>its like the output from a funky source to source translator.
> >
> >If you couldn't find one, perhaps, you should have kept your opinion
> >to yourself?
> 
> Are YOU going to say that is a maintainable style?
>
> Does anyone here have a good understanding of hacking on lout core
> other than Dr Kingston?

*shrug*.  ctags, idutils and similar utilities work even better than
trying to remember the file names anyway.  And yes, I did hack on Lout
internals a bit.

Lout is basically in maintenance mode, so relative value of any
prettification churn to what is now a 20+ years old codebase is
strictly negative.

-uwe