Re: variable MAKEOBJDIR inside of Makefile

On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 02:23:11PM -0800, Greg A. Woods wrote:
 > > Everything about make's magic objdir behavior is a bug.
 > 
 > Indeed, but I think the problem is in implementing a feature like
 > .OBJDIR support in any way that is sufficiently simple for a human
 > programmer to understand and manage.

Not really. I mean, it's certainly easy to make messes but in the case
of language and semantic stuff like this, the trouble arises from
implementing without first designing.

The core problem is that chdir changes the meaning of relative paths,
and (a) make lives on paths and (b) relative paths are strongly
preferred to absolute paths so that the location of your checkout
doesn't get entangled into the build.

This makes the whole idea (of having an OBJDIR you chdir to) suspect.
It's perfectly reasonable to not chdir but still put your build output
into an object directory; tools that don't work correctly in that
style are broken should be fixed regardless. This is what I'd
recommend if designing a new build system, or new build tools.

In the current scheme, relative paths are implicitly relative to
.OBJDIR. This means that if you change .OBJDIR partway through reading
the makefile, it changes the meaning of the rules you've already read
and partially processed. It also invalidates the results of any
lookups via .PATH you've done. So it doesn't work, can't work
(regardless of other implementation issues that may exist), and is
prohibited.

There are several ways that one might improve this. One relatively
easy one is to stick say $(.OBJDIR.CWD) in front of every relative
path while loading the makefile, and then allow changing .OBJDIR up
until the point where $(.OBJDIR.CWD) is first evaluated; that point is
when you actually chdir. (And $(.OBJDIR.CWD) always expands to "./".)

Doing much better than that requires improving make's internal phase
structure. In a world where make parsed first, you could set .OBJDIR
after parsing and before interpreting any string other than an include
name as a path. In that world includes would be relative to
the source directory rather than the object directory and that'd be
fine, probably even desirable.

(I started trying to move make to that world at one point, a long time
back now, but didn't get very far and rillig's gone off in other
directions since.)

All schemes that involve chdiring will result in injecting absolute
paths where it's better to have relative ones, though, so it's always
going to be a second-best method.

-- 
David A. Holland
[email protected]