* Baurzhan Ismagulov wrote on Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 12:57:33PM CET: > On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 07:54:34PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > I suppose to fix TAGS you may need to rename EXTRA_maude_SOURCES to a > > macro name not specially recognized by automake. > > This does eliminate duplicates, but references .processed.cpp in TAGS. > Ideas?
Not good ones. You could overwrite $(SOURCES), but that may have other consequences, too. > > > > > 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. > > > I'm aware of the limitations of this approach. Do you see an alternative > > > for the described use case? > > > > Complain to the vendor? > > I am the vendor, in a sense :) -- the code originates from a previous > employee. I have no problems to modify the process as long as the users > get roughly the same functionality. Well, allow the preprocessor to write its output into a different file. Even cooler, allow it to read on stdin and output on stdout, unix style. But anyway let it accept '-o outfile' as argument, and either '-f infile' (it's ok to let the non-option arguments be input files, too), possibly with '-' specifying stdin. At least -o solves the problems with corrupted sources due to interrupted builds. Cheers, Ralf
