I agree. Adding Guile to support GNU makefile macros would be a great thing.
What I had meant in my previous post was that replacing the rule-based portion with a LISP-like language would be a bad thing. Noel > Ken Smith wrote: > > I like the idea of adding something like Guile to Gmake. It would make generating > complicated makefiles more straightforward. > > Ken Smith > > Noel Yap wrote: > > > Boris Kolpackov wrote: > > > > > >> "Paul D. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> > >> > >> > >> > That might be true, but Lisp is really a very good language for a make > >> > scripting language, since much of make's behavior, at least in terms of > >> > expansion of variables, etc. is somewhat Lisp-like already. > >> > > >> > > >> Just a thought: rather than adding a lisp-like language to make wouldn't > >> it be easier to implement make-like inference system in lisp? > >> > >> Comments? > >> > >> > > The meat of make is rule-based so I would think that replacing this with a > > functional programming language would not be a good thing. > > > > MTC, > > Noel > > > > -- NOTICE: If received in error, please destroy and notify sender. Sender does not waive confidentiality or privilege, and use is prohibited. _______________________________________________ Help-make mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-make
