https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=287430
--- Comment #8 from Chad Jacob Milios <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Jason E. Hale from comment #6) TL;DR: sure does! good to close, thanks! maybe ${:!${LLVM_CONFIG} --version!:R} tho, no? --More--(33%) Retested with llvm20 in place and llvm19 selected. Thank you so much for the excellent [and prompt!] work going that extra mile rather than telling us to punt it to poudriere --More--(END) `cat $MUSINGS` Nothing at all wrong with how youve implemented it but for your consideration (for this or the next thing) since clearly u r a bona fide wizard of ports & bmake: 1. ${:!foo!} [vs] `foo` (modifiers can chain, lazy eval vs late) 2. ${LLVM_CONFIG} --version [vs] ${MAKE} -C $elsewhere -VFOO (maybe sparse tree) 3. :S/./ /g:[1..2]:ts. [vs] :R (if paranoid of !~ x.y.z in the future/multiverse) 4. for good measure an explicit :tw (are semantics of :S/foo/ / very well defined?) so all chained together its: ${:!${LLVM_CONFIG} --version!:S/./ /g:tw:[1..2]:ts.} Surely im overthinking it but i'm glad to discuss the pitch black magic with a fellow o.g. :) iron sharpens iron. So then, might you happen to know a more clear/concise method than the line noise that is my suggestion 3 yet which makes fewer assumptions than :R must? (i mean an elegant one i'm overlooking; obvs we can contrive a dozen various uses of :C///) This sorta $1.split("$2").splice(${3:-0},${4:-HUGE_VAL}).join("${5:-$2}") situation is pretty common, no? Just 1 & 2, given our manageable expectations are pretty reliably met: ${:!${LLVM_CONFIG} --version!:R} -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
