Re: Further progress on include_server macro processing

I changed groups within Google about two years ago, moving from the build
tools group to the speech group.  Since then I haven't been as active as I
used to be.  However I still follow the mailing lists, and try to respond to
every patch eventually.  I am also planning to make a new distcc release in
the next few months.

Over the last couple of months, I have been travelling quite a bit, with
most of the time since before Christmas spent not at home.  I should have
more time available in the next few months.

I am very supportive of efforts to make pump mode work with the boost
headers.
On Feb 16, 2011 7:44 PM, "Martin Pool" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 16 February 2011 22:51, Alastair Rankine <[email protected]>
wrote:
>> So as a followup to my last email, I've found a few bugs in the macro
processing code in the include_server. This doesn't yet mean that the boost
headers can be parsed in a reasonable time, but I'm going to continue to
work on it.
>>
>> I've got a branch here which has fixes and test cases for all the bugs
found to date:
>>
>> https://code.launchpad.net/~arankine/distcc/issue16
>>
>> Briefly, the fixes are as follows:
>>
>> - Handle ## operator immediately following a function-like macro:
FOO(bar)##baz
>> - Handle spaces between a symbol and parens for a function-like macro
invocation: FOO (bar)
>> - Handle spaces in the argument list of a multiple argument macro
definition & invocation: FOO(bar, baz)
>> - Spaces around the ## operator as mentioned in the previous email: a ##
b
>
> I had a look over them and they look pretty plausible.
>
> I don't know if Fergus is very active on this anymore. (I heard a
> rumor about Google having switched to a fork of distcc based on their
> proprietary infrastructure?) Perhaps you should get commit access if
> you want to work on it.
>
>>
>> By the way, In the last email I was trying to float the idea of not
populating the value set with verbatim function-like macros. I haven't yet
decided whether or not this is a good idea, so I haven't committed it to the
branch above.
>>
>> Very much interested in any feedback.
>> __
>> distcc mailing list            http://distcc.samba.org/
>> To unsubscribe or change options:
>> https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/distcc
>>
>>
> __
> distcc mailing list http://distcc.samba.org/
> To unsubscribe or change options:
> https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/distcc

__
distcc mailing list            http://distcc.samba.org/
To unsubscribe or change options:
https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/distcc