On Thu, 2 Dec 2021 19:12:37 GMT, Andrew Leonard <aleon...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Oh, I didn't expand the diff far enough to actually see the context >> correctly when I reviewed this as I would never have imagined the >> conditional to be placed after the rule. While this will work as so far as >> using the correct files, incremental builds will not be correct, because the >> rules are defined in the first pass. >> >> I very much agree with Magnus that this conditional belongs around line 63. > > yes, thanks, feeling rather stupid here! i'll raise an issue to fix @andrew-m-leonard Don't be. Make is a horrible programming language, both syntactically and semantically. It's taken me years to be somewhat comfortable with it, and often I just manage to get it right only by sticking to a few, well-proven and battle-hardened patterns. :) ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6647
