Re: [PATCH 23/25] syntax-check: enable sc_program_name.

[Gary V. Vaughan]

Hi Stefano,

Thanks for the review.

On 15 Nov 2011, at 22:39, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 November 2011, Gary V wrote:
>> * cfg.mk (local-checks-to-skip): Remove sc_program_name
>> list of disabled checks.
>> (exclude_file_name_regexp--sc_program_name): Don't check demo
>> programs for use of set_program_name.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Gary V. Vaughan <address@hidden>
>> ---
>> cfg.mk |    3 +--
>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/cfg.mk b/cfg.mk
>> index 1d6ca3c..48d063e 100644
>> --- a/cfg.mk
>> +++ b/cfg.mk
>> @@ -46,12 +46,10 @@ local-checks-to-fix =                            \
>> local-checks-to-skip =                               \
>>      $(local-checks-to-fix)                  \
>>      sc_GPL_version                          \
>> -    sc_program_name                         \
>>      sc_trailing_blank                       \
>>      sc_unmarked_diagnostics
>> 
>> # GPL_version: checks for GPLv3, which we don't use
>> -# program_name: libtool has no programs!
>> 
> But then, since libtool doesn't offer any "real" program, what is
> the point of enabling the `sc_program_name' check?

Quite arguably, there is no point at the moment.  But at some point
we may grow a "real" program (ltmain.c has been on the horizon for
many years), and letting syntax-check run everything it has if at all
possible means we won't have to remember to go back and enable those
additional NOP tests if that day ever arrives.

If you object strongly, I can be persuaded to change my mind however.

Cheers,
-- 
Gary V. Vaughan (gary AT gnu DOT org)