Re: .NULL/.NOSUFFIX (was: Make and makefile bugs (PRs 49085, 49086, 49087))

[Jarmo Jaakkola <jarmo.jaakkola%roskakori.fi@localhost>]

On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 11:54:20AM +0200, Edgar Fuß wrote:
> >     .NOSUFFIX.s2:
> >         commands
> > 
> >     Suffix transformation from "" to ".s2".
> I like that one (indeed I would have been proposing that hadn't you done it).
> 
> But what's the Problem in making
> .s1.NOSUFFIX:
>       <commands>
> 
> equivalent to
> 
> .s1:
>       <commands>
> 
> for symmetry and to be able to explicitly express what one means?
> I also think it's easier to read.

Probably there would be no problem and symmetry would be nice.
I just really didn't consider adding it as a permanent feature, just as
a stop gap measure to get rid of the problematic .NULL and still
offer a replacement for the aspect with no other replacement.  It would
then be completely replaced by pattern rules in the future.

I guess it is now a moot point, if we'll still be keeping the .NULL
feature.  It might make sense to add that for legibility in the future,
but that is a separate issue.  The suffix rules can't just go away
for backwards and POSIX compatibility reasons, I'd say.

-- 
Jarmo Jaakkola