Follow-up Comment #12, bug #63686 (project make): > Paul, if you decide to do the special target, do you intend to let that special target have prerequisites, e.g. targets for which the feature is enabled? No, the prerequisites of the special target are the warning control options:
.WARNINGS: error undefined-var:ignore > it's worth considering which model is more flexible in a cooperative arrangement. Well, we could always support both :) If you set warnings on the command line they'd be in MAKEFLAGS and be in effect for recursive invocations. If you add a special target, those values would NOT be in MAKEFLAGS and be in effect only for the current makefile. Something that might be simpler than a special target, would be a special variable like .WARNINGS or something. The reason I suggest a variable is that it's much easier to manipulate it and investigate its value, save it and restore it, etc. Special targets are static and tricky to work with. The downside of a special variable is deciding how it should be considered WRT delayed expansion etc. is more complex (can you make a target-specific variable assignment that's in effect only for that target for example?) But of course, it could be that we go to a lot of trouble to support capabilities that people won't really care about anyway. _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?63686> _______________________________________________ Message sent via Savannah https://savannah.gnu.org/