[analog-help] The next 'best' analyzer...?

[Per Jessen]

Dimitri Maziuk wrote:

> Per Jessen wrote:
> ...
>> Maybe introducing autoconf into the build?
> 
> Please don't: applications that use libtool tend to only build on
> "GNU's Not Unix". Besides, if the code is written in $language -- as
> opposed to GNU$language, most of autoconf's checks are unnecessary
> cruft. Perhaps if someone rewrites analog in gunk (aka gnuc) it'll
> need an automagical check if c compiler can create excutables and
> isn't missing stdio.h. But as it stands now, it ain't broken to begin
> with.

Alright, then perhaps not autoconf itself, but the general "edit the
header file" configuration method is a little dated, so some kind of
assisted config tool would come in handy.  



/Per Jessen, Zürich