From:	Hans-Bernhard Broeker <broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: No rule to make file?
Date:	4 Nov 2000 18:46:22 GMT
Organization:	Aachen University of Technology (RWTH)
Lines:	23
Message-ID:	<8u1lhu$gar$1@nets3.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE>
References:	<8u13u0$7bo$1 AT venus DOT telepac DOT pt>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	acp3bf.physik.rwth-aachen.de
X-Trace:	nets3.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE 973363582 16731 137.226.32.75 (4 Nov 2000 18:46:22 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT rwth-aachen DOT de
NNTP-Posting-Date:	4 Nov 2000 18:46:22 GMT
Originator:	broeker@
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Paulo J. Matos aka PDestroy <pdestroy AT netcabo DOT pt> wrote:
> Hi,

> I'm having a problem in compiling something. I have a relatively big project
> with some files to compile.
> One of the classes I have is a C++ template so the extension is lists.hpp
> and the header is lists.h.

And that's your problem, already. Make doesn't know about .hpp
files. In particular, it doesn't follow your reasoning that .hpp would
be a C++ source file that can be compiled into a lists.o object files.
You should name the source file lists.cpp or lists.cc, otherwise
'make' can't guess it's a C++ file.  Or you can add your own suffix
or pattern rule for .hpp files.

OTOH, for typical use of templates, I seem to remember there usually
is no separately compilable code anyway, so it would be wrong to put
'lists.o' into the list of files to be built.


-- 
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.

- Raw text -