Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Path: utzoo!utdoe!contact!ross
From: ross@contact.uucp (Ross Ridge)
Subject: Re: A question on C programming style
Reply-To: ross@contact.UUCP (Ross Ridge)
Organization: Contact Public Unix BBS. Toronto, Canada.
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 91 00:54:35 GMT
Message-ID: <1991Apr17.005435.26299@contact.uucp>
References: <1991Apr12.103621.8907@umiami.ir.miami.edu> <1991Apr13.013911.18151@athena.mit.edu> <KERS.91Apr15093213@cdollin.hpl.hp.com>

In article <KERS.91Apr15093213@cdollin.hpl.hp.com> kers@hplb.hpl.hp.com (Chris Dollin) writes:
>I handle this particular problem by having entries
>for each .h file, treating the includes as ``dependencies'', with a ``touch''
>command as the action: thus, if foo.h includes bar.h and baz.h, I have
>
>    foo.h: bar.h baz.h
>	touch foo.h

Well I tend to think something on the order of:

	fred.o: fred.c foo.h bar.h baz.h
	bob.o: bob.c foo.h bar.h baz.h
	jane.o: jane.c foo.h bar.h baz.h

is the way to go.  It's a better representation of the true depedencies.
But to make this more managable I use a simple make macro:

	FOO_H = foo.h bar.h baz.h

	fred.o: fred.c $(FOO_H)
	bob.o: bob.c $(FOO_H)
	jane.o: jane.c $(FOO_H)

This lets you quickly update your makefile when add or remove #include's
from your foo.h file.  (It also has the great advantage of letting you
do "FOO_H =" when you get fustrated because every little change to foo.h
causes everything to be recompiled.)

								Ross Ridge

Disclaimer:  This isn't my idea, I stole it from the GNU CC makefile.
I wonder if this makes this covered by the GNU copyleft?  Hmm...
-- 
Ross Ridge								 //
"The Great HTMU"							[oo]
ross@contact.uucp							-()-
ross@watcsc.uwaterloo.ca						 //