Re: Quirk with rules producing multiple output files

[Tim Murphy]

There are commercial emulations of GNU make that can handle multiple outputs. I don't want to plug them because that might be annoying. It's just worth mentioning that it can be done.

Regards,

Tim

On 11 April 2013 11:14, Reinier Post <address@hidden> wrote:

On Thu Apr  4 16:17:58 2013, address@hidden (Paul Smith) wrote:

> This is expected behavior.  A rule like:
>
>     foo bar:
>             @echo $@
>
> is exactly the same thing, to make, as writing:
>
>     foo:
>             @echo $@
>     bar:
>             @echo $@
>
> It's just a shorthand for writing a lot of identical rules; it does NOT
> mean that a single invocation if the rule will generate all three
> targets, which is what you are expecting.

Incidentally: other workflow/inference languages can express this
distinction perfectly and still allow the resulting specifications to
be analyzed for proper termination (e.g. safe Petri nets, Datalog);
I'd love to know of an alternative to make that is based on such a
language, but it seems too much to ask for make to be extended
in this way.

--
Reinier

_______________________________________________
Bug-make mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make

--
You could help some brave and decent people to have access to uncensored news by making a donation at:

http://www.thezimbabwean.co.uk/friends/