On 8/16/07, Jason Curl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > NightStrike wrote:
> > Why is this not a toggleable option of some sort? Why force a user > > into a difficult situation that will end up having a kludgey > > workaround? (like something that auto-generates the makfile.am, > > bringing the total layers to what.. 4? some script > makefile.am > > > makefile.in > makefile. ) The justification sounds a little like > > giving someone a gun but not ever letting him disengage the safety. > > > > I understand why using $(wildcard ...) variables is discouraged, as > > it's not portable. Having automake generate the source file list > > according to some regular expression is, however, an *extremely* > > useful advanced tool. > > > I don't think it makes sense to have this feature. I have a bunch of > source files that are conditionally compiled based on the system it's > building on. Why would I want to compile these on all systems? I don't > think it warrants (IMO) to increase the complexity of autoconf by adding > another feature like this one. Instead of saying what I want in a build > system, I'd have to change it to what I /don't/ want. > > For auditing purposes, I'd rather know precisely what's a part of my build. An option that can be toggled, or an alternative approach to specifying source files, is just that -- an alternative, an option. No one would be forcing the use of wildcards. It doesn't work for your project -- great. But there do exist projects for which it would have benefits. That's the purpose of offering options to people.
