Windows configuration output

[Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com>]

The progress output from out configuration script on Windows
is inconsistent. It looks like this:

Configuring for msvc-7.1 - 11d Debug Dll
Checking if compiler is sane...   ok
Checking if linker is sane...   ok
Checking if run environment is sane...   ok
Checking system architecture ILP32 little endian
Checking for headers...
Checking for <cassert>...   ok
Checking for <assert.h>...   ok ("c:\\Program Files\\Microsoft Visual 
Studio .NET 2003\\Vc7\\include\\assert.h")
...
Checking for <ieeefp.h>...  no (_RWSTD_NO_IEEEFP_H)
Checking for <pthread.h>...  no (_RWSTD_NO_PTHREAD_H)
Checking for namespaces  ok
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Here we're missing the "..."

Checking for std::acos() in cmath...   ok
...
Checking for extern "C" snprintf() in libc...   no
Checking for std::vsnprintf() in cstdio...  no
Checking for extern "C" vsnprintf() in libc...   no

In the above we're missing the name of the macros in parentheses.

...
checking for atomic operations...   ok _RWSTD_NO_ATOMIC_OPS

Here the macro should not be displayed (we should only display
it when the test fails). We should also be consistent in our
use of capital and lowercase letters -- i.e., either use
"Checking..." everywhere or "checking..." I would be inclined
to go with the lowercase alternative since that won't require
us to change all the config tests where the text is hardcoded.

Martin

Re: Windows configuration output

[Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com>]

Martin Sebor wrote:
> The progress output from out configuration script on Windows
> is inconsistent. It looks like this:
> 
[...]
> Checking for std::acos() in cmath...   ok

Also, in the above cmath should be <cmath> to make it clear that
we're checking the standard header. Similarly, cstdio should read
<cstdio> (and <stdio.h> if we're checking in the traditional
headers).

> ...
> Checking for extern "C" snprintf() in libc...   no

Here, we should replace the name libc with the name of the C library
on Windows (msvcrt or whatever is appropriate for the build type).

Anton, could you please make these changes?

Thanks
Martin