Follow-up Comment #3, bug #52209 (project make):
Thanks Paul for dealing with this so quickly.
For the benefit of clarity (and the poster of comment #1), the parallel
between what I propose and the existing preprocessor version is deliberate as
I value consistency in design.
There has been an eq function in the source code for a long time, but it is
disabled behind an experimental flag. I think the problem is that eq
introduces a fixed idea of a true result as it always returns 1 for true.
Introducing eq would effectively change the representation of true from
non-empty to 1 on a conceptual level - and conceptual changes are always
risky.
The ifeq function proposal is an attempt to allow support for testing equality
without needing to change the concept of true. It also allows the same
flexibility of the existing $(if..) function where an action could be taken on
the result, for example to generate an error if strings don't match:
$(ifeq $(first),$(second),,$(error something broke))
I will try and contribute a patch, but I don't know when I'll have time and I
wanted to make an enhancement request in the meantime.
To the poster of comment #1. Yes, I posted anonymously for reasons I don't
need to explain here. It's unfortunate you think that makes me an idiot and my
contribution only worth mocking and I'm very glad that Paul never thinks that
way. I'm not keen on sharing my email address with the world, and your
response makes me want to do that even less. This is not a point-scoring
teenage forum and I'm only interested in talking technical, but after taking
your own advice, if you still feel the need to insult me personally my name is
below.
regards,
Rob.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?52209>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via/by Savannah
http://savannah.gnu.org/
_______________________________________________
Bug-make mailing list
Bug-make@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
