ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From ru...@us.ibm.com
Subject Re: Objections against advanced directory scanning
Date Wed, 02 Feb 2000 16:14:13 GMT


Bill Petheram wrote:

> Well I didn't realise that you weren't going to use regular expressions.
If
> you had said that initially then we could have saved a lot of e-mails.
>
> 'Regular Expressions are too difficult for ordinary users'. It seems to
me
> that you aren't expecting many Unix people to use ant.

Now, now.  Play nice.

Suppose somebody where to propose changing the "ls" command so that from
now on you would need to type

   ls .*\.class

instead of

   ls *.class

as you do today.  Would you think most Unix users would think of the
change?

> 'the '**' feature it is exaclty what most users find natural.'  Most
ordinary
> non Unix users you mean.

I know of no system, Unix or otherwise, that supports "**", so that's bad.
The question is what is the most minimal extension to what essentially is
the syntax supported by the Unix ls command (which incidentally is
remarkably similar to syntax supported by the DOS dir command) to meet the
basic needs of ant.

Arnout has proposed "**".  Constructive suggestions for alternatives are
welcome.

- Sam Ruby



Mime
View raw message