Follow-up Comment #9, bug #30381 (project make): Maybe we can use something like
%(1).foo%(2) : %(1)a%(2) So your example will look like %(1).foo : %(1)a%(1) I agree with Reiner. make can be better and has more features, then current implementation. At least all functions from http://gmsl.sourceforge.net/ can be very good to have in standard make. Basically I see in source some EXPERIMENTAL blocks already. :-) _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?30381> _______________________________________________ Message sent via/by Savannah http://savannah.gnu.org/ _______________________________________________ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
