Re: shortest stem

[Boris Kolpackov]

Hi Paul,

Paul D. Smith <address@hidden> writes:

> > > For example, what about:
> > > 
> > >   %.o : %.c
> > >   %-d.o : %.y
>
> 
> Here's a thought.  What if we were even more picky, and ONLY re-ordered
> rules where the prerequisites were also identical?

What about things like this:

%.o: %.c
%-mt.o : %-mt.c

Or like this:

%.o: %.c
system/%.o: system/%.c

Conceptually, I feel that pattern specificity should be the first
criteria for picking rules (i.e., rules that match what you are
trying to build more precisely are considered first). Prerequisites
are the second criteria, not part of the first criteria.


> So, in my example above, it would work the same way as it does now
> because the prerequisites were different.

Yes, but is it the right way? Why should '.c' prerequisite be preferred 
to '.y'? On the other hand, I think it is clear that %-d.o should be
preferred to %.o when we are building foo-d.o.


Boris