Re: make: problem with multiple pattern targets

[Paul D. Smith]

%% Damian Marriott <address@hidden> writes:

  dm> I think I have found a problem with GNU make 3.79.  Under
  dm> "Multiple Targets in a Rule" it gives an example which says
  dm> something like a b: c; d $@ is equivalent to a: c; d $@ and b: c;
  dm> d address@hidden  Now I have a situation where I want to do this where a 
and
  dm> b are patterns.  Does this statement still hold.  I would suggest
  dm> the implementation at this point says no.  So should it still
  dm> hold?  I would like it to!

Both the implementation _and_ the documentation say no, and no it is :).

See the GNU make manual section _Introduction to Pattern Rules_ to find
out what a pattern rule with multiple targets means.
-----------------------------

  dm> This does remind me of a requirement which I have thought would be
  dm> nice, and that is to be able to use the foreach expansion or
  dm> something similar to expand complete rules, possibly to be used in
  dm> combination with define.  Just a thought.

Many people have wished for this type of thing (expressions that can
evaluate to rules) for many years... this is actually going to be
implemented in 3.80.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Paul D. Smith <address@hidden>          Find some GNU make tips at:
 http://www.gnu.org                      http://www.paulandlesley.org/gmake/
 "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist