Re: Tail call elimination

2020-05-11 Thread Pete Dietl
And I swear that's the last thing I want. :)

Re: Tail call elimination

2020-05-11 Thread Pete Dietl
Indeed I understand these concerns. So the consensus seems to be that I may go ahead and attempt to implement this. Other than the (let) and tail call optimization, I would like to know your thoughts about adding something like $(expr ) to evaluate integer expressions and comparisons.

Re: Tail call elimination

2020-05-11 Thread Paul Smith
On Mon, 2020-05-11 at 14:01 -0500, Pete Dietl wrote: > What do you all think about me attempting to implementing tail call > elimination for recursive make functions? This combined with the > proposed (let) construct would be rather powerful. If it's straightforward it doesn't bother me. I'd have

Re: Tail call elimination

2020-05-11 Thread Tim Murphy
Yes we do want make to be a first class language and have had to put up with it being a b*** a*** to do computations and impossibly slow to use $shell. Regards, Tim On Mon, 11 May 2020, 20:47 Daniel Herring, wrote: > Hi Pete, > > I like your enthusiasm and understand the benefit. If this can

Re: Tail call elimination

2020-05-11 Thread Daniel Herring
Hi Pete, I like your enthusiasm and understand the benefit. If this can be done cleanly, then why not? However, I am still vaguely uneasy about the idea. I don't think Make will ever be a first-class programming language. Prolog was a better general-purpose language, but more people use M

Tail call elimination

2020-05-11 Thread Pete Dietl
What do you all think about me attempting to implementing tail call elimination for recursive make functions? This combined with the proposed (let) construct would be rather powerful. I did the first 10 exercises in Advent of Code 2019 in Make. but ran into problems with blowing the stack from rec

[bug #57692] Parallel make doesn't work well with grouped targets

2020-05-11 Thread Robert Sachunsky
Follow-up Comment #4, bug #57692 (project make): > There is a token in .FEATURES for this capability already Oh, pardon me, I accidentally took an old version for testing. > Notice *groupd-target* here. Splendid! Would you care for a patch/PR of the manual explaining this, with an example (alo

[bug #57692] Parallel make doesn't work well with grouped targets

2020-05-11 Thread Paul D. Smith
Follow-up Comment #3, bug #57692 (project make): There is a token in .FEATURES for this capability already: $ echo '$(info $(.FEATURES))' | ./make -f- target-specific order-only second-expansion else-if shortest-stem undefine oneshell nocomment grouped-target extra-prereqs archives jobserver out