Re: Proposed syntax for static make-also rule

[Paul D. Smith]

Without thinking about it for longer than a minute, I wonder why you
chose ":&" instead of "&:"?

The latter seems to me to more naturally suggest that the feature
applies to the targets (before the ":" separator) while the former seems
to me to imply something about the prerequisites (coming after the ":").

This might also solve the problem of ":|" (since the corollary to "&:"
is "|:") although I don't know about implementing that... that requires
more than a minute's thought :).

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Paul D. Smith <address@hidden>          Find some GNU make tips at:
 http://www.gnu.org                      http://make.paulandlesley.org
 "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist