+1 for having separate 'make tags' and 'make TAGS'. Cheers,
Tris On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 09:14:46AM +0000, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote: > | > good point. Could we call them 'tags-emacs' and 'tags-vim'? > | > | We could do, but tags and TAGS are the standard names. > | > | We could also have separate "make tags" and "make TAGS" commands, which > | generate only the named file. > | > | Whatever the decision, implementing it will be easy. > | > > Does it matter whether it's standard? Esp if the standard doesn't work on > Windows and MacOS. The file names are self-describing, and the 'make' target > could emit a message to say what the outputs are called. > > It'd be good to decide one way or t'other and clear it away. Does anyone > else care? > > (This can't be a new problem.) > > S > > _______________________________________________ > Cvs-ghc mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc -- Tristan Allwood PhD Student Department of Computing Imperial College London _______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
