Makefile.am does not need to be linear. In fact, Makefile.am is
sufficiently high-level enough that if and when we get there, we will
see that Tim already did the job. We just need to re-structure
Makefile.pamphlet first. You won't have to write Makefile.am,
because you will write Makefile.pamphlet (should they be renamed to
Makefile.am.pamphlet? I don't know).
I guess the literate idea even says that it does not matter how a file
is called. It is most important that you write a paper from which you
can generate all the code (even different files from one pamphlet
source). That sounds nice, but in some sense I find that very difficult
to maintain. For ALLPROSE I set the convention every file is a .nw file.
(I don't yet had the need to store file types like .fig or .png or other
strange formats where the noweb-style makes no sense.)
The file keeps its original name with just .nw added. From that I
generate .nw.tex files (that basically makes just one Makefile rule to
generate latex). That naming convention has some advantages.
1) If you generate .dvi from the .nw.tex file. It is easily possible to
click into the dvi file and jump to the .nw (not .nw.tex) source. VERY
convenient.
2) At least for .as.nw file... If the compilation breaks and the Aldor
compiler were able to understand the "#line ..." directives correctly,
then one could use a smart editor (e.g emacs) to run the compilation
inside a buffer and jump directly to the place in the source where the
compiler found the error.
I suggest to adopt that convention for axiom (replace .nw by .pamphlet).
Ralf
_______________________________________________
Axiom-developer mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
