[m-rev.] for post-commit review: update style in extras

[Zoltan Somogyi]

For review by anyone.

When trying to test this, I found that the bootcheck option to test the extras
doesn't work, and probably hasn't worked for a long time. I think this should
be fixed, and kept fixed (by enabling the option by default); the question is how.

At the moment, there are several different arrangements in different
subdirs of extras. Partially this is because some extras dirs contain just
a program, while others contain a library, with or without some example
programs that use the library. The fact that the library-using programs
are in a different directory from the library itself makes compiling
the program by hand a bit harder (with the current absence of
the needed make/mmake rules).

There are several setups we could standardize:

- the library and the program(s) using it are stored in the same dir

- the library is in the top dir, the programs using it are in subdir

- the library and the programs using it are both in separate subdirs

The first is the simplest for testing. The second and third both require
either copying source files between directories, or linking a program
in one dir to a library in another dir. On the other hand, the first does not
delineate the boundary around the library as clearly as the other two.

I don't have a preference between these alternatives, but I do think
we should pick one and use it consistently.

Opinions?

Zoltan.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Log.ex
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 1538 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mercurylang.org/archives/reviews/attachments/20230330/12636218/attachment-0002.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: DIFF.ex
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 661185 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mercurylang.org/archives/reviews/attachments/20230330/12636218/attachment-0003.obj>