>%% "Dill, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > dj> That's nice to know, but it seems a little too verbose. I'd like > dj> to do something more to the effect of 'include $(call > dj> guard,defs.mk)' or '$(call include_guard,defs.mk)' where guard > dj> would do something to check the appropriate tag. > >include_guard = $(if $(filter $1,$(.VARIABLES)),,$1) > >Unfortunately there's a problem here: I think plain "include" with no >file after it might be considered an error.
Yep, that's true. The other option is to include an empty dummy file. That could be incorporated into the include_guard. I don't think '-' is the correct route since I want to still have errors on bad include filenames. >If so you'll need to use eval. > >You need GNU make 3.80 for this. > > dj> Also, can you implement something like '$(call function,defs.mk)' > dj> which will return the text of 'include defs.mk' if that test > dj> passes, and make will perform the include. > >No, but you can use eval to do it. Again you need GNU make 3.80. > > dj> Also, can functions be used reliably to define variables? > dj> Something like: > > dj> $(call tx_include_name,defs.mk):=1 > >Sure. Sounds like a good reason to upgrade. I have been using 3.79.1. It appears there is a mingw version I can use. At the moment, is 3.79.1 still pretty widespread? I may have to support that make if it is still widely used. Thanks, John _______________________________________________ Help-make mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-make
