Re: shortest stem

Hi Paul,

Paul D. Smith <[email protected]> writes:

> 	%.o : %.y
> 	%.o : %.c
> 	%-m.o : %.x
> 
> we want the .o to be built from the .y, always, if it exists, even from
> -m.c.  Or whatever.
> 
> The nice feature of the current behavior in make is that it is simple to
> understand, completely flexible (you can get any behavior you want by
> modifying the order), and 100% predictable.  Of course the downside is
> that it might be difficult, in very complex makefile environments, to
> get your rules to order the right way.  And, I guess, the behavior is
> not what some people intuitively expect.

Yes, it is only simple and flexible in simple makefiles. Once you start
assembling rules from different makefile, things become unpredictable.
I also have never seen or can think of a real situation where the logic
you describe above would be application. Though that doesn't mean such
a use-case doesn't exist.

I am personally fine with either the enabled by default or enable by 
mentioning a special target approach, so it is your call. Or we can try
to enable it by default to start with and see if the release candidate
uncovers anythings interesting.


Boris

-- 
Boris Kolpackov, Code Synthesis Tools  http://codesynthesis.com/~boris/blog
Open-source XML data binding for C++:  http://codesynthesis.com/products/xsd
XML data binding for embedded systems: http://codesynthesis.com/products/xsde