On Sun, Jun 9, 2019 at 2:47 PM David A. Wheeler wrote:
>
> Idea: Allow certain special targets as dependencies
>
> Problem:
> It's often the case that a target also needs to be a special target. E.g.:
> .PHONY: all
> all: do-this do-that
>
> Obviously this *works*, but it consumes many extra lines
On Sun, Jun 9, 2019 at 7:46 PM Masahiro Yamada
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 10:38 AM Paul Smith wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 2019-06-09 at 18:46 -0400, David A. Wheeler wrote:
> > > As syntactic sugar,
> > > I'd like to see selected special targets allowed as dependencies.
> > > When this happens
Hi.
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 10:55 AM Paul Smith wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2019-06-09 at 18:53 -0400, David A. Wheeler wrote:
> > There's also no need for it. If "name" is followed by whitespace it *cannot*
> > be a POSIX variable reference, because POSIX doesn't allow that.
> >
> > Solution:
> > Just al
On Sun, Jun 09, 2019 at 10:11:32PM -0400, Paul Smith wrote:
> On Sun, 2019-06-09 at 18:24 -0400, David A. Wheeler wrote:
> > Proposed solution:
> > By default, make should check the timestamp of the non-.PHONY target(s)
> > produced after
> > executing a rule, and ensure that their timestamps are
Another idea: Enable .ONESHELL to be per-target.
Problem: According to the docs .ONESHELL is global in effect,
so using it in an existing makefile requires a lot of rework.
In many cases .ONESHELL is primarily only useful only
for specific rules, and there's no need to rewrite the rest.
The curre
Idea: Add .COMMANDCHANGE and .CACHE
Problem:
Paul Smith noted on Sun, 09 Jun 2019 22:11:32 -0400:
> Most of the requests I see these days that would require a "last state
> database" wouldn't be helped by md5 checks: mainly they're asking for
> things like rebuilding targets automatically when co
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 4:56 AM David A. Wheeler wrote:
>
> Another idea: Enable .ONESHELL to be per-target.
>
> Problem: According to the docs .ONESHELL is global in effect,
> so using it in an existing makefile requires a lot of rework.
Strongly seconded, I would definitely use this. I've been
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 9:20 AM David A. Wheeler wrote:
>
> Idea: Add .COMMANDCHANGE and .CACHE
>
> Problem:
>
> Paul Smith noted on Sun, 09 Jun 2019 22:11:32 -0400:
> > Most of the requests I see these days that would require a "last state
> > database" wouldn't be helped by md5 checks: mainly th
If you can't make first-class functions that are the equal of $(filter) or
$(subst) or whatever, or indeed replace them, then it seems like a bit of a
fudge for the sake of 4 characters.
I think one could end up having huge discussions about this to a pretty
limited benefit and miss spending the t
On Mon, 10 Jun 2019 12:10:26 -0800, Britton Kerin
wrote:
> The trickery required is not too fancy:
>
> foo.o: foo.c Makefile
> ...
> or
>
> foo.o: foo.c $(PARANOID_REBUILD)
> ...
>
> Then use when desired:
> (export PARANOID_REBUILD=Makefile && Make)
N
On Mon, 10 Jun 2019 22:46:23 +0100, Tim Murphy wrote:
> If you can't make first-class functions that are the equal of $(filter) or
> $(subst) or whatever, or indeed replace them, then it seems like a bit of a
> fudge for the sake of 4 characters.
You can make functions that do the work of $(filte
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 4:56 AM David A. Wheeler
> wrote:
> > Another idea: Enable .ONESHELL to be per-target.
On Mon, 10 Jun 2019 11:47:19 -0800, Britton Kerin
wrote:
> Strongly seconded, I would definitely use this. I've been
> attracted to it many times but never dared try globally.
> Wo
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 2:18 PM David A. Wheeler wrote:
>
> On Mon, 10 Jun 2019 12:10:26 -0800, Britton Kerin
> wrote:
> > The trickery required is not too fancy:
> >
> > foo.o: foo.c Makefile
> > ...
> > or
> >
> > foo.o: foo.c $(PARANOID_REBUILD)
> > ...
> >
> You can probably make a case for either one, but .ONESHELL already
exists, so let's just expand what's already there.
It's also worth noting that .ONESHELL is a recommendation from POSIX.
There's a note in POSIX.2 that says something along the lines of "Recipes
should have been passed to a singl
On Mon, 10 Jun 2019 15:40:53 -0800, Britton Kerin
wrote:
> No, just the rules that :Makefile, which you can easily tune if it matters.
> Heck, you can include some_fragment.mk that has the recipes that
> are a concern and depend on that if you really need that granularity,
> and then the dependen
On further reflection I noticed a bug in my .CACHE proposal.
Below is a discussion of the bug, and my proposed solution to it.
The proposed solution turns out to be a minor change,
but it might not be obvious why it needed changing.
So I'm explaining that in detail below.
TL; DR version: If .CACH
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 12:46 PM David A. Wheeler wrote:
>
> On Mon, 10 Jun 2019 11:56:04 +0900, Masahiro Yamada
> wrote:
> > It is a design.
>
> Sure, but we can add to it.
>
> > In summary, there is slight difference between
> > a variable and a user-defined function.
> > Omitting 'call' makes
17 matches
Mail list logo
