Terminology.
Am 20.04.20 um 23:37 schrieb Johnson, Andrew N. via Core-talk:
> On Apr 20, 2020, at 2:48 PM, Ralph Lange via Core-talk
> Also, any rules for the generation of the report files should be
> pattern rules that only apply to the expected targets. It is very
> hard to work around something like the existing implicit "%.xml:
> %.tap" rule when - like in the Google Test case - the test executable
> creates both xml and tap output directly.
>
> That’s fine, I don’t see a problem with using pattern rules for
> these, see below.
> [...]
> -%.tap: %.t
This is a pattern rule.
> +$(TAPFILES): %.tap: %.t
This is a static pattern rule.
I am sure you two are aware of the difference, but people not so
familiar with GNU make intricacies may be confused.
Cheers
Ben
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- Replies:
- Re: tapfiles double-colon rule Ralph Lange via Core-talk
- References:
- tapfiles double-colon rule Johnson, Andrew N. via Core-talk
- Re: tapfiles double-colon rule Ralph Lange via Core-talk
- Re: tapfiles double-colon rule Johnson, Andrew N. via Core-talk
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
Re: [Merge] ~dirk.zimoch/epics-base:dbChannelForDBLinks into epics-base:7.0 mdavidsaver via Core-talk
- Next:
Re: [Merge] ~dirk.zimoch/epics-base:dbChannelForDBLinks into epics-base:7.0 Dirk Zimoch via Core-talk
- Index:
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
<2020>
2021
2022
2023
2024
- Navigate by Thread:
- Prev:
Re: tapfiles double-colon rule Johnson, Andrew N. via Core-talk
- Next:
Re: tapfiles double-colon rule Ralph Lange via Core-talk
- Index:
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
<2020>
2021
2022
2023
2024
|