Peter Samuelson wrote: > > My current implementation of if_dep is *not*, as previously theorised, > a drop-in two-way replacement for adding dependencies to the end of > dep_* statements. I currently have it short-circuiting, so statements > are in effect *not* executing in the 'n' case (or the 'm' case, for > bool / dep_bool). > > In other words, my implementation matches current 'if [ ]' behavior, > and this was on purpose. I suppose this should be made clearer in the > documentation.
Ok, great. > > I think a better solution would be to provide separate "if"like > > statements,[...] > > I think that is overengineering. Sure. I was just saying that if we want a conditional statement with combined value+visibility semantics, it should be separate from the one that really matters, i.e. that which matches the old "if" semantics. > (This works because I currently specify that the = operator treats '' > as 'n'. I suppose this "feature" is worth debating, but I think it is > useful.) Given that the makefiles treat "n" and "" as separate values with the same interpretation, i.e. "don't build this", it would be more intuitive to have the config system behave similarly as far as is possible. Greg. -- the price of civilisation today is a courageous willingness to prevail, with force, if necessary, against whatever vicious and uncomprehending enemies try to strike it down. - Roger Sandall, The Age, 28Sep2001. ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 _______________________________________________ kbuild-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kbuild-devel
