Re: Makefile target naming conventions

On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 05:27:08PM -0800, Daniel L. Rall wrote:
> Well, I was following the pattern established by Justin with the
> "javahl-java", "javahl-tests", and "javahl-javah" targets, and perpetuated
> by myself in r9080 with the "swig-java-java", "swig-java-api",
> "swig-java-tests" targets.

I must have missed those targets.

> Justin did use a "clean-javahl" target, and I followed suite with
> "clean-swig-java" target (also in r9080). I noticed the difference, but
> figured it wouldn't be long before someone would clue me in on what
> convention we are actually using.
>
> [action]-[thing-being-built]-[anything-more-here?] ???

I don't think we've been following any particular convention. Except
the bindings targets have been [action]-[binding].

Either way is fine with me. As long as we stay consistent.

-- 
Ben Reser <ben@reser.org>
http://ben.reser.org
"Conscience is the inner voice which warns us somebody may be looking."
- H.L. Mencken
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org