Jup, its me again, and I found another one. Maybe I'm a bit too busy with this and maybe I have problems to scan the whole bug archive to check if my problems already have been noted. Thus...
I currently try to use make with many many many nested defines - wouldnt it be nice to be able to write e.g. Python scripts inside of Makefiles instead of this own define-endef thing; but thats another side of the coin that shouldn't be that difficult (as an optional plug-in). I currently try to code a make-framework that is more easy to use and where the users do not have to think alot (especially if they want to do complex things like CORBA-idl-generations and alike). Thats why I found this one (shortened as usually):
define D1 $(1)$(2) endef
define D2 $(call D1,$(1)) endef
all: ; @echo $(call D2,1,a)
Suprisingly to me the result is "1a" and not "1". My idea is that D1 gets 2 parameters and all that are not passed (as in D2) should be just empty and not "borrowed" from somewhere. I personally can live with that (currently) but one actually has to be very carefully and write
define D2 $(call D1,$(1),) endef
to supress the "borrowing".
cheers, Jörn
P.S.: A public developent-source-distribution would be nice. I have problems to reach the CVS rep of gmake - actually it does not work due whatever reason.
-- Dr. Jörn von Holten Senior Consultant
Barco Orthogon AG Hastedter Osterdeich 222 D-28207 Bremen Tel +49-421-20122-426 Fax +49-421-20122-999 www.barco-orthogon.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________ Bug-make mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
