[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: pre- and post-compilation hooks
From: |
Ralf Wildenhues |
Subject: |
Re: pre- and post-compilation hooks |
Date: |
Tue, 18 Nov 2008 19:54:34 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
* Baurzhan Ismagulov wrote on Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 04:22:38PM CET:
> This does work:
Good.
> maude_SOURCES = maude/maude.processed.cpp
>
> EXTRA_maude_SOURCES = maude/maude.cpp
>
> .cpp.processed.cpp:
> python $(top_srcdir)/myscript.py $<
> mkdir -p `dirname address@hidden
> cp $< $@
>
> SUFFIXES = .cpp .processes.cpp
>
> However, I would really like to avoid duplicating every source file in
> maude_SOURCES and EXTRA_maude_SOURCES (the necessity to write a custom
> make clean and duplicated TAGS entries being other minor points).
You can write
maude_SOURCES = $(EXTRA_maude_SOURCES:.cpp=.processed.cpp)
(or vice versa (expressing EXTRA_maude_SOURCES from maude_SOURCES),
however you like). Yes you have to add stuff for cleaning.
I suppose to fix TAGS you may need to rename EXTRA_maude_SOURCES to a
macro name not specially recognized by automake. In that case, you have
to take care of distribution of those files yourself, though.
> Is adding pre-compilation hooks to automake a good idea? Or is there
> any other way to do that?
Not sure if any more question remain open here.
> > > Hmm, a nice trick! However, the preprocessor reads .cpp files, possibly
> > > updates them and another tool's input file, and writes them back as
> > > .cpp.
> >
> > What a brain-damaged design. Can you give it options to write to a
> > different file? Does it at least update the file atomically?
>
> I'm aware of the limitations of this approach. Do you see an alternative
> for the described use case?
Complain to the vendor?
Cheers,
Ralf