First, I think there may be a bug. Did you intend that appending empty
data would always append a newline, such that the file grows by one
newline every time? It's consistent with the new documentation but not
with what you wrote above (If the file does exist and it's opened for
append then the
Thanks, this will make a lot of people happy.
One nit: as mentioned earlier I think it would be good to document the
relationship of $(file ...) with timestamps. Assuming nothing special
is done (I haven't looked at the code) then writing a null string will
not update the timestamp. I tried to
On Mon, 2012-01-30 at 17:44 -0500, David Boyce wrote:
Thanks, this will make a lot of people happy.
One nit: as mentioned earlier I think it would be good to document the
relationship of $(file ...) with timestamps. Assuming nothing special
is done (I haven't looked at the code) then writing
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 6:19 PM, Paul Smith psm...@gnu.org wrote:
Is there something special you would prefer beyond this?
Well ... it's more of a thought than an actual request or preference,
but I'm suggesting that make might want to take positive steps in your
last case (empty text argument,
On Mon, 2012-01-30 at 21:33 -0500, David Boyce wrote:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 6:19 PM, Paul Smith psm...@gnu.org wrote:
Is there something special you would prefer beyond this?
Well ... it's more of a thought than an actual request or preference,
but I'm suggesting that make might want to
On Mon, 2012-01-23 at 09:52 -0800, Lawrence Ibarria wrote:
I do like this suggestion, feels quite clean!
I implemented the write side of this proposal and committed it to CVS,
along with regression tests and documentation.
The read side is slightly more work but I can do this one too if
people
I do like this suggestion, feels quite clean!
-- Lawrence
-Original Message-
From: Paul Smith [mailto:psm...@gnu.org]
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 5:15 AM
To: Lawrence Ibarria
Cc: bug-make@gnu.org; Tim Murphy (tnmur...@gmail.com)
Subject: Re: 'withfile' function implementation
On Thu, 2011-12-15 at 15:13 -0800, Lawrence Ibarria wrote:
This is a rather simple path that implements a very simplified version
of what Tim suggested in his message of Sept 25th
(https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-make/2011-09/msg00044.html ).
Paul, what do you think? I’d rather not
Just a quick comment on this.
I looked at the implementation and it seems like a different name
would suit this function - e.g. writefile. It basically writes text
from it's arguments out to a file.
The idea of a function called withfile seems hard to actually
implement - I'm not sure how one
On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 12:41 +, Tim Murphy wrote:
I looked at the implementation and it seems like a different name
would suit this function - e.g. writefile. It basically writes text
from it's arguments out to a file.
Thanks all; I'll take a look.
--
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Tim Murphy tnmur...@gmail.com wrote:
would probably be quite nice and they don't absolutely demand that one
use the C library mode flags (w,w+,a etc). This is one thing that
Paul didn't like from the previous suggestions.
A bit of a sidetrack, but I don't agree
11 matches
Mail list logo
