Hi,
The example that I'm familiar with has had to invent a way to specify
various special features without affecting make syntax - in other words
similar to the kind of problem that gmake itself faces.
I think you may see discussions about it earlier in this or other gmake
mailing lists but it's basically like #pragma in C/C++. e.g.
TEST_TEXTS := test1.txt test2.txt test3.txt
#pragma multi
$(TEST_TEXTS) : xtest.txt
echo "Rebuilding $@"
touch $(TEST_TEXTS)
So it looks like the previous example but the make engine knows that in
this case one invocation of the rule is intended to generate all the
outputs rather than the standard GNU interpretation of one invocation per
target.
This idea has not found favour with GNU maintainers so far because it isn't
an elegant extension of the GNU Make language and that is understandable
but companies don't tend to wait around tor perfect solutions and it is at
least a useful way to add implementation-specific features to make. It
leaves the language untouched in such a way that older versions of make or
other emulations can at least parse it.
If you google "pragma multi" you will find a better explanation than I can
give.
Regards,
Tim
On 11 April 2013 19:35, David Sankel <cam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 12:31 PM, Tim Murphy <tnmur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> There are commercial emulations of GNU make that can handle multiple
>> outputs. I don't want to plug them because that might be annoying. It's
>> just worth mentioning that it can be done.
>>
>
> Can you provide an example of what syntax these other packages use for
> multiple output rules?
>
> --David Sankel
>
--
You could help some brave and decent people to have access to uncensored
news by making a donation at:
http://www.thezimbabwean.co.uk/friends/
_______________________________________________
Bug-make mailing list
Bug-make@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
