ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From cos...@eng.sun.com
Subject Re: What flavour of scripting?
Date Wed, 01 Mar 2000 20:06:52 GMT
> Costin wrote:
> >
> > +1 if we make variables substitution explicit. I don't like the fact
> > that the XML reader does variable magic ( please don't show me the CVS
> > logs or old mails !).
> 
> You are right, this was discussed before, and if you like, we can discuss
> it again.  Just separately please.
> 
> Fortunately, increasing the size of every class that implements Task, and
> introducing the possibility for inconsistencies and error (you can see on
> which side of this issue I come down on, eh?) doesn't affect what is really
> important - the simplicity, elegance, and power of build.xml.

Ok, let's discuss it again.
I think we should have both constants and variables.

Problems with "variables"

- order of execution. You may run 2 targets in paralel (
it's a reasonable thing - if you have a multiporcessor for example). In
this case you need complex rules for variables. 

- Only few tasks really need "variables" - in fact all current tasks are
working fine with "constants" ( or properties that we set before execution
and remain constant after that  ).

- The tasks that will need variables will have full control, and
will be better served by typed variables ( using "get/setAttribute()" ).
I don't think there will be too many tasks that really need this
kind of variables, and the setAttribute() API seems to work fine and is
not very hard. 


I think we need to use a different syntax for constants - like &entity;
( it is very easy to do that if we'll move to SAX - and it will make
clear what it means. Same behavior can be implemented using resolveEntity).




Costin







Mime
View raw message