Re: success!

[Chris Wiegand <cdwiegand home com>]

Hm...perhaps, however, a) configuration and flexibility is usually a Good 
Thing (tm), b) some people may want to speed up their compile time, and c) 
that's almost like saying that if you detect MySQL on their machine, then go 
ahead and compile the mysql provider (maybe you do, in which case it's a bad 
argument). 

I don't care myself too much, but others might. You could make it a 
--disable-compile-binding-cpp or somesuch and make it an opt-out sort of 
thing...

In the end it's up to you, of course, just thought I should bring the point 
up.

On Tue, 30 May 2000, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> Chris Wiegand wrote:
> > On Tue, 23 May 2000, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> > > Chris Wiegand wrote:
> > > > Okay, I finally got the C++ binding to compile almost all of the way.
> > > > The code compiles, but libtool's complaining:
> > >
> > > GREAT! They will go then to the upcoming release, as beta of course.
> >
> > I vaguely remember someone saying that ./configure would have a flag for
> > turning on and off the C++ bindings, but I can't seem to find it....
> > what's the -- option for it? I've removed (on my system) and re-cvs'd the
> > configure.in and Makefile.am just to be sure, and I still can't find the
> > flag.
>
> Well, I didn't add the flag, because you finally got the bindings to
> compile. What I'm going to add is the necessary checks in configure.in
> so that if you don't have a C++ compiler, make won't enter this
> directory. But I think they should be always compiled if a C++ compiler
> is found, don't you think so?

-- 
There is a story that a wise and pious man once stood before God, his
heart breaking from the pain and injustice in the world. "Why don't you
send help?" he pleaded. God responded "I did send help, I sent you."