Stepan Kasal <kasal@xxxxxx> writes: >> I already provided such a patch, that guarantees LIFO order in m4_wrap > ... >> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf-patches/2006-06/msg00060.html > > On a second thought, this is probably the best solution, let's > accept a variant of this patch (I have not reviewed it yet, sorry). Something like that sounds fine, but I worry about having m4_wrap behave differently from M4's m4wrap. That's an unhealthy naming convention. Also, I worry that non-Autoconf uses of m4_wrap will break with the new implementation, due to some obscure token-pasting or whatever (sorry, I'm waving my hands here). How about this idea instead? * Leave m4_wrap alone. * Use something like Eric's patch to define a new macro m4_wrap_fifo. * Modify Autoconf to use m4_wrap_fifo rather than m4_wrap. * Document m4_wrap_fifo. * Document that m4_wrap isn't portable. _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
