[comp.windows.x] Imake vs. "cpp"

guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris) (06/30/90)

>This is after it has been run through cpp.  Is cpp just really bed on
>the NeXT, or what?

Is there any reason why "imake" doesn't just use the DECUS "cpp", which
is supplied in source form with X11R4?  This would eliminate its
dependency on a piece of software that:

	1) is generally not supplied in source form by vendors;

	2) often has been tweaked to improve its ability to preprocess C
	   - that being, after all, its role in life - in ways that
	   interfere with its use by "imake";

	3) may not even *exist* on some systems.

jim@ncd.COM (Jim Fulton) (07/04/90)

	Is there any reason why "imake" doesn't just use the DECUS "cpp", which
	is supplied in source form with X11R4?

Lack of time.  I definitely had wanted to do it, but just never found the time
to bang the bits.