Re: makefile-mode font-lock bugs and annoyances

Re: makefile-mode font-lock bugs and annoyances

[Miles Bader]

Daniel Pfeiffer <dapfy@t-online.de> writes:
>>2. Highlighting of conditional constructs is broken:
>>
>>ifdef FOO
>>   blah
>>else
>>   blah blah
>>endif
...
> This is correct, because ifdef et al. are not keywords for make! The old
> makefile-mode mixed up make, gmake and automake, not allowing you to see
> when you wrote stuff for the wrong make into a makefile. In Emacs' own
> makefiles for example ifdef must *not* get highlighted for this very
> reason.

It's a fact of life that many, many, people use the name "Makefile" for
GNU-make-only makefiles, and if anything this practice has spread
greatly in recent years (I think I've only seen "GNUmakefile" used once
or twice in my entire life!).

Luckily, there's a really easy way to automatically distinguish between
"bad old make" Makefiles and "GNU make" Makefiles:  the presence of GNU
make extensions in the file.  In other words, just highlight them by
default, and let the contents of the file determine what they mean; it's
much more accurate than the filename in this case.

If you want to provide a "old make only mode", that's OK of course, but
it should be off by default.

-Miles
-- 
It wasn't the Exxon Valdez captain's driving that caused the Alaskan oil spill.
It was yours.  [Greenpeace advertisement, New York Times, 25 February 1990]

Re: makefile-mode font-lock bugs and annoyances

[Kim F. Storm]

Miles Bader <miles@lsi.nec.co.jp> writes:

> It's a fact of life that many, many, people use the name "Makefile" for
> GNU-make-only makefiles, and if anything this practice has spread
> greatly in recent years (I think I've only seen "GNUmakefile" used once
> or twice in my entire life!).

The default for emacs should be to treat ALL makefiles as GNU makefiles.

We may support other non-gnu makefiles, but not as the default choice.

-- 
Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> http://www.cua.dk

Re: makefile-mode font-lock bugs and annoyances

[Daniel Pfeiffer]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 867 bytes --]

la 09.06.2005 13:37 Kim F. Storm skribis:

>Miles Bader <miles@lsi.nec.co.jp> writes:
>  
>
>>It's a fact of life that many, many, people use the name "Makefile" for
>>GNU-make-only makefiles, and if anything this practice has spread
>>greatly in recent years (I think I've only seen "GNUmakefile" used once
>>or twice in my entire life!).
>>    
>>
>
>The default for emacs should be to treat ALL makefiles as GNU makefiles.
>  
>
Emacs own makefiles are not GNU make, being auto* based it uses plain 
make as do many other GNU projects.  Other like bison or omniORB do 
indeed use GNUmakefile.  I think I'd rather try to parse the file and 
see what's in it.

coralament / best Grötens / liebe Grüße / best regards / elkorajn salutojn
Daniel Pfeiffer

-- 
lerne / learn / apprends / lär dig / ucz sie;    Esperanto:
                              http://lernu.net/


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1491 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 161 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-pretest-bug mailing list
Emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-pretest-bug

Re: makefile-mode font-lock bugs and annoyances

[Kim F. Storm]

Daniel Pfeiffer <dapfy@t-online.de> writes:

>>The default for emacs should be to treat ALL makefiles as GNU makefiles.
>>
> Emacs own makefiles are not GNU make, being auto* based it uses plain
> make as do many other GNU projects. 

In what way is emacs' makefile _incompatible_ with GNU Make?

Or put another way, what part of the file is fontified _incorrectly_
if treated as a GNU Makefile?

-- 
Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> http://www.cua.dk

Re: makefile-mode font-lock bugs and annoyances

[Daniel Pfeiffer]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1209 bytes --]

la 10.06.2005 00:20 Kim F. Storm skribis:

>Daniel Pfeiffer <dapfy@t-online.de> writes:
>
>  
>
>>>The default for emacs should be to treat ALL makefiles as GNU makefiles.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>Emacs own makefiles are not GNU make, being auto* based it uses plain
>>make as do many other GNU projects. 
>>    
>>
>
>In what way is emacs' makefile _incompatible_ with GNU Make?
>
>Or put another way, what part of the file is fontified _incorrectly_
>if treated as a GNU Makefile?
>
ifdef, $(patsubst) and all that.  I was completely astounded to find 
that Emacs is not meant to be built with gmake, and I would have 
inadvertantly put these in, had I felt the need.  Emacs itself would 
have strengthened my belief that this is right, and then it would have 
broken it for all people and/or platforms without gmake. 

Note that I'm not arguing against the choice of automake here.  It may 
make sence for a lot of underequipped machines.  I'm only saying, if 
there is such a choice, it should be clear.

coralament / best Grötens / liebe Grüße / best regards / elkorajn salutojn
Daniel Pfeiffer

-- 
lerne / learn / apprends / lär dig / ucz sie;    Esperanto:
                              http://lernu.net/


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1912 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 161 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-pretest-bug mailing list
Emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-pretest-bug

Re: makefile-mode font-lock bugs and annoyances

[Kim F. Storm]

Daniel Pfeiffer <dapfy@t-online.de> writes:

>>Or put another way, what part of the file is fontified _incorrectly_
>>if treated as a GNU Makefile?
>>
> ifdef, $(patsubst) and all that.  

Sorry, but I don't see _any_ "ifdef" or "patsubst" in emacs' makefiles.

Not using those features doesn't mean that the makefile is not a
GNU makefile, does it?

Or do you mean that a makefile only becomes a GNU makefile is it
does use one of the GNU extensions?

I simple don't understand how making GNU Makefile the default can
break any "normal" makefile...

-- 
Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> http://www.cua.dk