At no time during the current make
processing does it jump out from the middle of the parser phase and into
the rule execution phase. Not only that but the behavior would be quite
surprising to people who are familiar with make, since no rules or
variables that were defined after the include direc
Hi Paul,
Thanks for the explanation. I am now satisfied you are telling the truth :)
Not really. The times where it makes any difference are very few, and
the performance penalty that would be incurred to re-invoke make after
each makefile was recreated could be quite large.
I checked this out. Us
Paul D. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If it is a bug then what you say is true, but I have never termed it a
> bug. It was a design decision taken between two alternative
> implementations, and the code is operating the way it was designed and
> intended to work.
I don't believe you ever
%% Boris Kolpackov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
bk> "Paul D. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
id> Ok, but I am surprised you don't you see any problem (bug) with
id> the current way?
>> Not really. The times where it makes any difference are very few,
bk> I don't think the presence o
"Paul D. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> id> Ok, but I am surprised you don't you see any problem (bug) with
> id> the current way?
>
> Not really. The times where it makes any difference are very few,
I don't think the presence of the bug is in any way affected by the number
of situat
%% "Ian Dunbar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
id> Ok, but I am surprised you don't you see any problem (bug) with
id> the current way?
Not really. The times where it makes any difference are very few, and
the performance penalty that would be incurred to re-invoke make after
each makefile was
Hi Paul,
Thanks for the clarification. I have still some questions though.
From: "Paul D. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
id> It would know that the order of making up to date has to be:
id> Makefile, sub.mk, subsub.mk, subsubsub.mk, etc., because if sub.mk
id> is out of date, there is no guarente
%% "Ian Dunbar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
id> I mean make would build "includer" files before "includee" files.
id> So if I have this kind of structure, where indentation indicates
id> incusion level:
id> Makefile
id> includes sub.mk
id> includes subsub.mk
id> includes
Hi Paul,
Thanks for your reply. I will try to clarify what I meant.
From: "Paul D. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
%% "Ian Dunbar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
id> In general, making the lowest file first seems like unusual
id> behavour. Shouldn't make know that it should regenerate included
id> fi
