# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2002-10-14 16:09:47 +0300:
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 02:14:23PM +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
> > # [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2002-10-14 14:36:22 +0300:
> > > On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 11:57:18AM +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
> > > > In any event, could someone point me to a place in the make(1)
> > > > man page where it says that the S and C modifiers dereference
> > > > variables given in both the pattern and replacement, while the N
> > > > and M modifiers insist on being fed literal strings? I couldn't
> > > > find it. Thanks! :)
> > >
> > > The last paragraph of the S modifier talks about variable
> > > expansion inside the "old_string" and "new_string". There is no
> > > similar talk in the M and N descriptions. Even the OpenBSD's
> > > make(1) is subject to this same restriction.
> >
> > Ok, so that's the missing part. Anyway, is there a technical
> > reason why this is so?
> >
> Yes, there is. You forgot to send us the patch. :-)
:) carefully, there. i'm only looking for a [tng]roff tutorial so
that I can start sending patches for the man page. :)
aside: not to insult anyone or anything like that, plus I'm aware
make is not a programming language interpreter, but it's really
braindamaged. consider this:
.for FOO in foo bar baz
FOO=${FOO}
.if !empty(FOO:S/baz//)
BAR+= ${FOO}
.endif
.endfor
all:
@echo BAR: ${BAR}
comment out the second line to break it.
--
If you cc me or take the list(s) out completely I'll most likely
ignore your message.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
