On Sun, 2022-05-08 at 22:10 -0500, John Wheeler wrote: > On 5/8/22 09:17, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote: > > Let me give a (very biased) summary of this: There's apparently a > > related (and undocumented) 'make TAGS' that is broken for out-of- > > tree builds. Instead of fixing this, the proposal was to add at > > least two new scripts with a parallel infrastructure. If we did > > this, then a few years from now somebody would wonder why there are > > two solutions and need to dig out the whole story again. This > > should really ring everybody's alarm bells of a path that is not at > > all maintainable! > I absolutely agree with making changes in the correct manner. I > spent too much of my career managing configuration change processes > not to know the pain doing it wrong will cause. In many respects I > share your bias. > > If I understand you correctly, the right way to address this is to > fix the 'make TAGS' feature and to document it. > > Would you agree?
Yes, this sounds reasonable. > > > > I will investigate whether I can add my desired functionality to > > > 'make TAGS'. > > Please note that 'lily/GNUmakefile' already has '--regex' for > > dealing with LY_DEFINE. I don't know whether that still works after > > Jean's recent changes, I think it should. At least on the C++ side; > > I don't immediately see links between C++ and Scheme, and I'm not > > sure this is desired. > Yes, part of the existing --regex for LY_DEFINE was broken by > Jean's MR!1329. Indeed, the second regex would add a tag for the Scheme function name before Jean's change. Maybe it's worth considering reverting it? Jonas
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
