[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [bug #52209] Support for ifeq function

From: Tim Murphy
Subject: Re: [bug #52209] Support for ifeq function
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2017 14:29:07 +0100

Sorry for "plugging" my work but you can use loadable modules to implement any function you like and I have done "ifeq" some time ago here:


... except my version is $(equals...)

This is a good way to experiment with what you want from the function before asking it to be added and of course you can provide a patch.



On 12 October 2017 at 07:26, anonymous <address@hidden> wrote:
Follow-up Comment #3, bug #52209 (project make):

Thanks Paul for dealing with this so quickly.

For the benefit of clarity (and the poster of comment #1), the parallel
between what I propose and the existing preprocessor version is deliberate as
I value consistency in design.

There has been an eq function in the source code for a long time, but it is
disabled behind an experimental flag. I think the problem is that eq
introduces a fixed idea of a true result as it always returns 1 for true.
Introducing eq would effectively change the representation of true from
non-empty to 1 on a conceptual level - and conceptual changes are always

The ifeq function proposal is an attempt to allow support for testing equality
without needing to change the concept of true. It also allows the same
flexibility of the existing $(if..) function where an action could be taken on
the result, for example to generate an error if strings don't match:

$(ifeq $(first),$(second),,$(error something broke))

I will try and contribute a patch, but I don't know when I'll have time and I
wanted to make an enhancement request in the meantime.

To the poster of comment #1. Yes, I posted anonymously for reasons I don't
need to explain here. It's unfortunate you think that makes me an idiot and my
contribution only worth mocking and I'm very glad that Paul never thinks that
way. I'm not keen on sharing my email address with the world, and your
response makes me want to do that even less. This is not a point-scoring
teenage forum and I'm only interested in talking technical, but after taking
your own advice, if you still feel the need to insult me personally my name is



Reply to this item at:


  Message sent via/by Savannah

Bug-make mailing list

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]