Re: Expanding variables as part of function arguments

[Todd Showalter]

On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Philip Guenther <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Anthony Penniston
> <address@hidden> wrote:
> ...
>> But going back to my original message, none of these solutions feel 
>> 'natural' to what ought to be a common task for make.
>
> I think this is the first time I've seen someone do something quite
> like this.  It seems a bit 'unnatural' to me for various reasons,
> including that I find determining what is involved in a project by
> scanning directories to be fragile, and that combining different types
> of object files (.o vs .class) in a single variable seems useless to
> me, [8<]

    Seconded.  If you do things this way, make has no sane way of
detecting deletion of project elements between invocation.  Which
means you can delete a source file, and make still thinks everything
is up to date and good.

    Determining part of your dependency chain with wildcarding will
invariably cause you difficult-to-debug grief sooner or later.

                                                  Todd.


-- 
 Todd Showalter, President,
 Electron Jump Games, Inc.