On Sat, 2017-06-17 at 20:21 +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > > my_test_command?=cat > > > > > > define my_rule_demo= > > > name::=${1} > > > $${name:.in=.txt}: ${1} > > > $${my_test_command} $$< > $$@ > > > endef > > > > > > $(eval $(call my_rule_demo,MOTD.in)) > > > > Is there something wrong with it? > I sent it just as another follow-up in the hope to reduce a few > of our communication difficulties. > Can such tiny code examples help in this dialogue at all?
Certainly they are very helpful, but only when combined with an explicit question or request. If you include a makefile with no discussion of what about it concerns you enough to send it to the mailing list, we don't know what to do with it. > > > How would you like to clarify remaining details from other requests? > > > > I'm sorry but I've lost track of what issues have been resolved versus > > which are still outstanding. If you can provide an example and a > > specific question, we can attempt to respond. > > I hope that there will no confusion occur with subjects from > my other recent discussion threads. > I am still curious about information I presented at 10:28. > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-make/2017-06/msg00093.html > > Repetition: > 1. Will it make sense to extend any documentation for “substitution > references”? Sure, it could be made clear in the documentation that either of the sides of the "=" could be empty. However, there are plenty of ways to do this same thing: In your situation where there's only one word in the ${1} variable, "${1:=.cmo}" is the same as writing "${1}.cmo" which is even simpler and easier to understand. In a situation where there may be multiple words in the variable that you want to modify, you can consider using the "$(addsuffix .cmo,${1})" function which is arguably more clear than using substitution references and does the same thing as using an empty left-hand side value. > 2. Can the distinction between appending suffixes and replacing them become > occasionally more relevant for better software build characteristics? I don't know how to respond to this. > Another software extension: > How are the chances to assign aliases to numbered temporary variables? At this time I don't see the need to add such a thing. At the moment I don't see a reasonable way to extend the existing "call" syntax to provide aliases. _______________________________________________ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make