[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] Modernize, improve and/or extend tests `colon*.test.
From: |
Stefano Lattarini |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] Modernize, improve and/or extend tests `colon*.test. |
Date: |
Sun, 8 Aug 2010 17:09:03 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.13.3 (Linux/2.6.30-2-686; KDE/4.4.4; i686; ; ) |
At Sunday 08 August 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > > Well, I'd prefer the extract_dependencies script approach
> >
> > I like the idea, too, but as I said I'd prefer to leave for a
> > later patch.
>
> That's fine of course. Just leave the corresponding code unchanged
> then.
I'll revert it, and add back a proper FIXME.
> > > which would be more correct and not the complicated perl script
> > > which wasn't as correct.
> >
> > Why not as correct?
> >
> > You said in a previous mail:
> > """
> >
> > A shell function in defs.in 'extract_makefile_deps TARGET
> > FILE' that contains a sed script similar to
> > extract_makefile_var that does what you want, and respects
> > backslash-newline?
> >
> > """
> >
> > But why should that function preserve backslash-newline
> > occurrences? Is not this an internal detail due to automatical
> > line-wrapping by Automake, which we should therefore ignore?
>
> No, it is an official API of 'make' that we program against. With
>
> tgt1 tgt2 \
> tgt3 : dep1 dep2 \
> dep3 \
> dep4
>
> Posix is perfectly clear about the list of targets
Should be "tgt1 tgt2 tgt3 tgt4", right?
> and the list of dependencies.
Should be "dep1 dep2 dep3 dep4", right?
> extract_makefile_deps can extract that.
I still don't understand how this qualifies as an objection to my
proposal.
> You're then still relying on not having $(macros) in the lists, so
> there is still an internal detail there, but I don't know how to
> avoid that easily.
>
> An even much more better check would be to only check semantics,
> i.e., that some target is actually updated when some dependency is
> outdated.
Added a FIXME comment about that too.
Regards,
Stefano
- Re: [PATCH] Modernize, improve and/or extend tests `colon*.test., Stefano Lattarini, 2010/08/05
- Re: [PATCH] Modernize, improve and/or extend tests `colon*.test., Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/08/08
- Re: [PATCH] Modernize, improve and/or extend tests `colon*.test., Stefano Lattarini, 2010/08/08
- Re: [PATCH] Modernize, improve and/or extend tests `colon*.test., Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/08/08
- Re: [PATCH] Modernize, improve and/or extend tests `colon*.test.,
Stefano Lattarini <=
- Re: [PATCH] Modernize, improve and/or extend tests `colon*.test., Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/08/08
- Re: [PATCH] Modernize, improve and/or extend tests `colon*.test., Stefano Lattarini, 2010/08/08
- Re: [PATCH] Modernize, improve and/or extend tests `colon*.test., Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/08/08
- Re: [PATCH] Modernize, improve and/or extend tests `colon*.test., Stefano Lattarini, 2010/08/08
- Re: [PATCH] Modernize, improve and/or extend tests `colon*.test., Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/08/08
- Re: [PATCH] Modernize, improve and/or extend tests `colon*.test., Stefano Lattarini, 2010/08/08
- Re: [PATCH] Modernize, improve and/or extend tests `colon*.test., Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/08/08
- Re: [PATCH] Modernize, improve and/or extend tests `colon*.test., Stefano Lattarini, 2010/08/08
- Re: [PATCH] Modernize, improve and/or extend tests `colon*.test., Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/08/08
- Re: [PATCH] Modernize, improve and/or extend tests `colon*.test., Stefano Lattarini, 2010/08/08