Re: make: Unclosed variable specification for

[David Laight <david%l8s.co.uk@localhost>]

On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 04:48:35AM +0000, David Holland wrote:
> 
> In principle, certainly. In practice, it's fairly difficult even if
> make weren't a mess inside, because make syntax isn't really
> structured enough. And on top of that, make *is* kind of a mess
> inside. A lot of the current problems arise because it parses and
> re-parses and scans over the same text repeatedly and doesn't always
> use quite the same rules each time.

I do have a plan to add a function to obtain a token from the source,
either with or without expnasion - but in the latter case still going
through the same parser.
Using it in a few places (ie the LHS of assigments and dependencies, and
the arguments of conditionals) would remove a lot of the places where
text is parsed more than once.

Unfortunately I need to more quickly correct some of the existing code
first - since the the change to the .for loop expansion has exposed
some code that only worked with .for loop control variables.

        David

-- 
David Laight: david%l8s.co.uk@localhost