Boris Kolpackov wrote: > > Alessandro Vesely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Boris Kolpackov wrote: > > > [...] > > > The idea is much simpler than that: GNU make needs scripting facility. > > > Instead of reinventing the wheel (by implementing our own) we can just > > > reuse something suitable. Guile seem like the best choice so far. > > > > Make could also load a shared object that contains user defined functions, > > a la PHP. > > For most tasks it is too low-level; it is much easier to write your function > on lisp than to write it on C, build DSO, load it into make, etc.
I don't think so. Actually, writing a short C prog that does what's needed is a common technique. The prog has access to selected make's variables (those that you expand on its command line) and returns values via $(shell). The more exotic functionality of calling specific entry points of a DSO is similar in principle. I don't know how you're going to implement guile support in make. Perhaps, if DSOs loading already existed, then that could be achieved by simply defining guile as a preloaded DSO (arranging for the not quite standard behaviour of gh_enter().) > Also I believe Guile supports loading DSOs and calling functions from them. Yes, it does. http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/docs/guile-ref/Dynamic-Libraries.html However, that will not check if the DSO is up to date. > > >The so may build on the fly, as it happens with included files. > > I was thinking about this too but realized that it often creates a chicken > and egg problem [...] OTOH libguile.so will still need to be built with make... _______________________________________________ Help-make mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-make
