[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: forcing a rule

From: Boris Kolpackov
Subject: Re: forcing a rule
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 12:36:34 -0600
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.4i

Hi Noel,
> I'd need to "sell" the patch to our GNU make maintainers; it would need to 
> pass certain criteria before I can even suggest it.

Let me know if I can be of any help.

> Are there any downsides to using the patch (eg builds take considerably 
> longer, ...)?

I didn't notice significant downside but it is not free either. Patch
makes make variable-expand implicit rule's prerequisites for every
time there is a match (but not every time implicit rule is tried).
Since most rules don't use double expansion this second expansion is 
just an additional search in a (usually) not very long string for '$'.  

I use it extensively in my build system to build directories and it 
works really well.

> Have you submitted the patch to the GNU make project (via I 
> believe)?  

Well, I found this to be pretty useless. I submitted a patch for 
$(lastword ) which is a very simple patch with a very straightforward
(IMO) argumentation and there is a precedent ( $(firstword) ). Since
I submitted it a few months ago I never heard a word back. Also, I saw 
a far more bizarre features added to make meantime (like SysV $$@ & 
friends) so it makes me wonder...

So I started my own patch-set with hope that if more people find it
useful we will be able to get it into official make.  

> Has this feature been discussed on this list?

I haven't seen anybody express interest in such a feature (until now)
so there was no point in discussion.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

reply via email to

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