Re: Checking application of dependencies from make rules without recipes

[SF Markus Elfring]

> I don't think that's relevant: a graph's topology isn't dependent
> on the order in which its arcs are enumerated.

I have tried to stress the construction sequence.


> When you submit a test case that demonstrates a bug,

I stumbled on two special cases depending on your view of the corresponding
software situation.
I am unsure if any more evolution will happen there.


> then I'm sure someone will look at it.

Would you like to take another look at a detail from my clarification request
on the topic “Checking file generation for a test script”?
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-make/2017-06/msg00126.html


> Expressions calculating prerequisites are a notable case, causing "variables 
> before rules"
> to be one guideline for writing makefiles.

Thanks for your information.


> You claimed that the inability to cancel an explicit rule meant something 
> important

I got an acknowledgement that the handling of explicit rules is generally 
different
in comparison to implicit rules in specific cases.


> about whether explicit rules or implicit rules should come first.
> Paul prompted you to explain what that was, but you haven't.

I thought that I have tried this.

Now again the documented detail for an ordering constraint:
Implicit make rules can be cancelled. So it is expected that something did exist
to be switched off on concrete demand.

Regards,
Markus