Follow-up Comment #5, bug #18335 (project make):
No one is suggesting integrating Guile just to provide math functions. There
are a lot of operations which are not covered by the current suite of make
functions (take a look at the various enhancement requests, etc. for new ones)
and I'm not interested in writing an entirely new procedural language in
make.
There certainly would be some performance savings from an "embedded shell",
but perhaps not as much as you'd expect since /bin/sh needs to still run
programs such as sed, awk, etc. to do most of its work. As well, while you
might save an exec call per instance, even an embedded shell interpreter would
have to do a lot of forking: that's just how the shell works. Probably, to
preserve current semantics, it would need to fork for every rule it ran. On
some systems forks are cheap, but definitely not all.
Guile is the standard embedded scripting language for GNU. It also has a
syntax that meshes well with make's syntax, which already relies on parens
etc. Having shell syntax embedded in a makefile involves a lot more escaping
of parenthesis, dollar signs, etc.
And finally, as far as I'm aware there is no embeddable shell interpreter
available anywhere, and I'm sure not interested in writing my own.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?18335>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via/by Savannah
http://savannah.gnu.org/
_______________________________________________
Bug-make mailing list
Bug-make@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
