Re: [Axiom-developer] [build-improvements] Requests for discussion

[Ralf Hemmecke]

> Makefile.am does not need to be linear.  In fact, Makefile.am is
> sufficiently high-level enough that if and when we get there, we will
> see that Tim already did the job.  We just need to re-structure
> Makefile.pamphlet first.  You won't have to write Makefile.am,
> because you will write Makefile.pamphlet (should they be renamed to 
> Makefile.am.pamphlet? I don't know).

I guess the literate idea even says that it does not matter how a file 
is called. It is most important that you write a paper from which you 
can generate all the code (even different files from one pamphlet 
source). That sounds nice, but in some sense I find that very difficult 
to maintain. For ALLPROSE I set the convention every file is a .nw file. 
(I don't yet had the need to store file types like .fig or .png or other 
strange formats where the noweb-style makes no sense.)
The file keeps its original name with just .nw added. From that I 
generate .nw.tex files (that basically makes just one Makefile rule to 
generate latex). That naming convention has some advantages.

1) If you generate .dvi from the .nw.tex file. It is easily possible to 
click into the dvi file and jump to the .nw (not .nw.tex) source. VERY 
convenient.

2) At least for .as.nw file... If the compilation breaks and the Aldor 
compiler were able to understand the "#line ..." directives correctly, 
then one could use a smart editor (e.g emacs) to run the compilation 
inside a buffer and jump directly to the place in the source where the 
compiler found the error.

I suggest to adopt that convention for axiom (replace .nw by .pamphlet).

Ralf