[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2006/11/20]
> I only have 1 screen of make code calling about 2000 lines of Python code. > The problem is that the screen of make code is written to integrate my > stuff into a make "system" of several thousands lines. I didn't say it was your fault. It's still a problem that Make shouldn't be trying to solve. I tend to avoid almost all the "features" of Make that you listed, but I know that some of them are actually necessary. NOT the ones only documented in "info" files, though. Anytime info files come up I know I'm going to need a good helping of coffee, beer, and slavewater before I'm done. > Oh no! The rules don't *modify* the makefiles. They just generate a > shitload of *.d files which are then included and -included in different > places. I assume you're being sarcastic about this not being "modifying the Makefile". :) > *Of course* self-modifying code is evil. So *why the fuck* does make treat > dependencies as *code*, not *data*?? Well, I suppose you could call this "self-modifying data" instead, but that doesn't sound right. As soon as one part of the list of dependencies can change the meaning of another part of the list of dependencies, you've gone outside what Make should be expected to deal with. Whoever came up with that build system you're hooking into deserves your hate.There's stuff above here
Generated at 16:01 on 20 Nov 2006 by mariachi 0.52