[Omake] Newbie: removing quotes for command

[Hugo Ferreira]

Hello,

Aleksey Nogin wrote:
> On 21.03.2007 10:09, Hugo Ferreira wrote:
> 
>>> % INCLUDES[] = a b c
>>> - : <array
>>>        "a" : Sequence
>>>        "b" : Sequence
>>>        "c" : Sequence>
>>>        : Array
>>> % addprefix(-I, $(INCLUDES))
snip
>>
>> Now I am still baffled. It seems like whether or not I use the space, 
>> I still get a string (addprefix does not seem to be the in the list 
>> you provide below).
> 
> Not quite. What you get is a sequence. The main difference between a 
> string and a sequence is that the string is always interpreted 
> literally, while all the "special" characters in a sequence retain their 
> meaning.
> 
> For example, running osh in a directory that contains a file named "foo":
> 
> % ls $(addprefix f, *)
> foo
> % ls $"$(addprefix f, *)"
> /bin/ls: f*: No such file or directory
> - : <exit-code 1> : Int
> % ls $(addprefix f, $"*")
> /bin/ls: f*: No such file or directory
> - : <exit-code 1> : Int
> 

A parenthesis here: I did these tests above in version 0.9.6.5 and all 3
options worked. I am assuming this is inconsistent behavior that has
been corrected in the latest versions. However in the execution of the
target I use, it does exhibit the expected error.

> However, what addprefix (and pretty much every other "map-like" 
> function) does do is packing its results into array - and any spaces 
> inside array elements are taken literally (which is the whole point of 
> arrays - and is especially handy when you want to support 
> files/directories with spaces in their names).
> 

Ok. Finally got it.

> This is why, as Jason said, you need to use mapprefix - instead of 
> appending the prefix within the same array item (as addprefix does), 
> mapprefix creates a separate array element for each prefix:
> 
> % mapprefix(-I, $(INCLUDES))
> - : <array
>        <array
>           "-I" : Sequence
>           "a" : Sequence>
>           : Array
>        <array
>           "-I" : Sequence
>           "b" : Sequence>
>           : Array
>        <array
>           "-I" : Sequence
>           "c" : Sequence>
>           : Array>
>        : Array
> 
> Or, if you want to see (the equivalent) flattened version,
> 
> % array($(mapprefix -I, $(INCLUDES)))
> - : <array
>        "-I" : Sequence
>        "a" : Sequence
>        "-I" : Sequence
>        "b" : Sequence
>        "-I" : Sequence
>        "c" : Sequence>
>        : Array
> 
>>> BTW, is there some reason why you are implementing your own build 
>>> recipes for OCaml (note that at the moment you recipes are missing 
>>> such things as dependency scanning, which may result in all kinds of 
>>> problems) instead of using the existing build/OCaml.om that comes 
>>> with OMake?
>>>
>>
>> I cannot use the latest and greatest version OMake which has the 
>> required recipes for menhir. I am therefore trying to use the files 
>> provided in its demos (by changing the compilation parameters).
> 
> What version of OMake are you currently using? 

I have 0.9.6.5.
I can try using the "unstable" version 0.9.6.9 (later versions are not
available).

> Unless you are using 
> something very ancient, it might be easier to try backporting a newer 
> OCaml.om (at least the relevant parts of it) than to write one from 
> scratch. An additional benefit of backporting, of course, is that it 
> should then be easier to switch to a more recent version of OMake in the 
> future.
> 

I figure to limit myself to an include and a single target:
MenhirMulti(libparse, parse.mly, $(MENHIR_FLAGS))

When I get a new version of OMake I need only:
1. Use the flag above as is
2. Add the MENHIR_ENABLED (set to true).
3. Remove 2 flags currently used by the include not used by the OMake system

Easier than backporting no?


Thank you for your help.
Hugo Ferreira.

> Aleksey
>