Re: intermediate files

[Paul Smith]

On Mon, 2010-10-25 at 07:57 +0330, ali hagigat wrote:
> > Note the last part: "or there is some other reason".  In this case,
> > the reason is that my.c is needed to get to my.o.
> 
> Because 'my.c' does not exist, there is always a reason to update it!!
> so when it won't be updated while it does not exist as the manual
> promised?

Not true.  my.c only needs to be updated if either (a) my.o does not
exist, or (b) my.c.in is newer than my.o.

If my.o exists and my.c.in is older than my.o, then make understands
that rebuilding my.c is not necessary and it won't do so (as long as
my.c is considered by make to be an intermediate file).  That's what the
manual is saying.

> > This is a frequently used English idiom.  "Leave something alone"
> > means not to touch it in any way.  In this case, it means Make will
> > not try to create B if it is an intermediate file that does not exist.
> 
> but the manual is saying:
> "...then make can leave well enough alone."
> You mentioned that, leave something alone is an idiom in English but
> where is "something" here?

http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/leave+well+enough+alone

> > It won't update it.  Again, "won't bother doing something" means
> > "won't do it".
> Why we do not use the simpler English sentence when 'won't bother
> updating' is equal to 'it won't update'?
> "bother updating is heavy for non English people" when a person is
> struggling to find out the logic.

Because the manual was written by people who enjoy writing, and reading,
English as full, rich language and they didn't want to create a document
that reads like a list of car repair instructions.

I'm not saying that's right or wrong, but that's the way it is.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Paul D. Smith <address@hidden>          Find some GNU make tips at:
 http://www.gnu.org                      http://make.mad-scientist.net
 "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist