Re: [Boost-build] bug: rule syntax shows no arglist (was Re: Question about SHELL command

From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-05 11:09:59

Larry Evans wrote:
> On 08/04/2007 09:19 PM, Larry Evans wrote:
>> On 08/03/2007 01:15 AM, Rene Rivera wrote:
>> [snip]
>>> And also...
>>>
>>> http://www.boost.org/doc/html/jam/language.html#jam.language.rules
>> This is inconsistent because it includes, at:
>>
>> http://www.boost.org/doc/html/jam/language.html#jam.language.rules
>>
>> the rule syntax (which is missing the arg list):
>>
>>    rule rulename { statements }
>>
> [snip]
> 
> This .html file apparently is produced from:
> 
>    boost/tools/jam/doc/bjam.qbk
> 
> applying the following diff would solve the problem
> (although I haven't actually tried it):

> ! rule /rulename/ ( /param1/ : /param2/ : /.../ : /paramN/ ) { 
> /statements/ }

Except the argument list definition is optional, so it's debatable 
whether to include it. But if we did, it would then make more contextual 
sense as:

   rule /rulename/ { /statements/ }

   or...

   rule /rulename/ ( /argument-list/ ) { /statements/ }

And the same would apply to actions. At which point I start thinking a 
comment to the effect of "you can optionally define argument lists to 
rules and action (see below)." But you tell me which of the two makes 
sense as a reader, and I'll change it.

-- 
-- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com
-- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com
-- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim - grafikrobot/yahoo