David Aguilar <davvid@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 12:57:46PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> ...
>> > for header in .h ewah/*.h vcs-svn/*.h xdiff/*.h
>> > do
>> > ...
>> > done
>>
>> Yes, that would be even better. Then you wouldn't even have to
>> worry about $IFS dance.
>
> The original motivation was to avoid picking up the generated
> common-cmds.h header file.
for header
do
case "$header" in $exceptions) continue ;; esac
...
done
with comments describing why these exceptions are made would be a
better way to go in such a case.
> It was the N_() function that was messing it up.
>
> Would it make sense to split out a separate patch that makes common-cmds.h
> check-headers clean?
Depends on why "gcc -c $header"-cleanliness needs to be strictly
enforced, I think.
"common-cmds.h" is merely a way to allow us maintain a part of its
single includer help.c mechanically maintained, and if anybody else
includes it, it is an error, even if that includer does so after
including "gettext.h".
Some effort would be required to butcher "common-cmds.h' to make it
include "gettext.h" but that amount of effort can be better spent to
add a check to make sure nobody else includes it, I would have to
say.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html