> Another option if you don't like non-static pattern rules or the
> special-case stuff involved, is to use a stamp file:
> yaccouts.stamp: parser.mly
> ocamlyacc $<
IIUC a degenerate form of this is to decide that "parse.ml" plays the
role of the stamp file, so you do
parser.ml: par
Dear Paul and Britton,
I'd really like to thank both of you for your time and for sharing your
experience and expertise, I found it really interesting to follow your
exchange.
I'll probably follow Paul's advice because on the project I work on it
will probably work just fine. However, just for sa
On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 12:44 PM, Paul Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-07-26 at 12:31 -0800, Britton Kerin wrote:
>> It's still worth it to avoid non-static pattern rules though IMO.
>
> I use normal pattern rules all the time in all my makefiles. Love 'em,
> and I see no point in trying to avoid the
On Wed, 2017-07-26 at 12:31 -0800, Britton Kerin wrote:
> It's still worth it to avoid non-static pattern rules though IMO.
I use normal pattern rules all the time in all my makefiles. Love 'em,
and I see no point in trying to avoid them.
YMMV of course, just providing a different viewpoint.
__
On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Paul Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-07-26 at 09:17 -0800, Britton Kerin wrote:
>> Another option if you don't like non-static pattern rules or the
>> special-case stuff involved, is to use a stamp file:
>>
>> yaccouts.stamp: parser.mly
>> ocamlyacc $<
>
> I ex
On Wed, 2017-07-26 at 09:17 -0800, Britton Kerin wrote:
> Another option if you don't like non-static pattern rules or the
> special-case stuff involved, is to use a stamp file:
>
> yaccouts.stamp: parser.mly
> ocamlyacc $<
I expect you want to add a "touch $@" to this recipe.
And, this
On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 5:31 AM, Paul Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-07-26 at 15:21 +0200, Sébastien Hinderer wrote:
>> Sorry, I meant:
>>
>> parsers := foo.mly bar.mly baz.mly
>>
>> $(parsers): %.ml %.mli: %.mly%.ml %.mli: %.mly
>> ocamlyacc $<
>
> No. That's a static pattern rule. You
OK thanks a lot Paul. Things are much clearer now.
Sébastien.
___
Help-make mailing list
Help-make@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-make
On Wed, 2017-07-26 at 15:21 +0200, Sébastien Hinderer wrote:
> Sorry, I meant:
>
> parsers := foo.mly bar.mly baz.mly
>
> $(parsers): %.ml %.mli: %.mly%.ml %.mli: %.mly
> ocamlyacc $<
No. That's a static pattern rule. You can't get this multiple targets
built with a single recipe
Thanks a lot to you too, Thomas!
Sébastien.
___
Help-make mailing list
Help-make@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-make
Sébastien Hinderer (2017/07/26 15:18 +0200):
> Oh great! I was not aware of this.
>
> So am I correctin assuming that something like
>
> parsers := foo.mly bar.mly baz.mly
>
> $(parsers): %.ml %.mli
> ocamlyacc $<
>
> would work the expected way?
Sorry, I meant:
parsers := foo.mly
Dear Paul,
Many thanks for your prompt and helpful response!
Paul Smith (2017/07/26 08:57 -0400):
> On Wed, 2017-07-26 at 09:24 +0200, Sébastien Hinderer wrote:
> > parser.mli parser.ml: parser.mly
> > ocaplyacc $<
> >
> > does nos say exactly this but is rather an abbreviation for
>
Am 26.07.2017 um 09:24 schrieb Sébastien Hinderer:
Dear all,
OCaml's parser generator, ocamlyacc, produces two files simultaneously.
For example, the command
ocamlyacc parsermly
will produce both parser.ml (the code of the parser) and parser.mli (the
interface of the parsing module, descrbing
On Wed, 2017-07-26 at 09:24 +0200, Sébastien Hinderer wrote:
> parser.mli parser.ml: parser.mly
> ocaplyacc $<
>
> does nos say exactly this but is rather an abbreviation for
>
> parser.mli: parser.mly
> ocamlyacc $<
>
> parser.ml: parser.mly
> ocamlyacc $<
Co
Dear all,
OCaml's parser generator, ocamlyacc, produces two files simultaneously.
For example, the command
ocamlyacc parsermly
will produce both parser.ml (the code of the parser) and parser.mli (the
interface of the parsing module, descrbing which symbols it exports).
I am wondering what's the
15 matches
Mail list logo