Re: [anjuta-devel] Rethinking the AnjutaProjectNode API

[Sébastien Granjoux <seb sfo free fr>]

Hi Abderrahim,


Le 19/08/2011 17:36, Abderrahim Kitouni a écrit :
> I tried to use the same name for the same AM thing, but I noticed some
> inconsistencies: LIBADD is once "Libraries:" and once "Additional
> libraries:" and LDADD is once "Additional objects:" and once
> "Libraries:"

Yes. It's because the autotools has slightly different meaning depending 
on the target. So it's not just a mistyping now perhaps we can find 
better names.


> One more thing: I noticed that VALAFLAGS isn't in the properties for a
> group (only AM_VALAFLAGS).

It's the same for all flags properties. I think that in project files 
you are supposed to modify AM_*FLAGS variable only. The *FLAGS are 
reserved for changes at build time.

Then, I'm wondering if it is not better to use VALAFLAGS, CFLAGS... as 
id because it would be useful to have the same id whatever is the 
project backend. I suppose that this isn't called AM_CFLAGS in a CMake 
project but probably the same mechanism is existing.


Regards,

Sébastien