Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 34873 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2000 13:16:22 -0000 Received: from fep9.mail.ozemail.net (203.2.192.103) by locus.apache.org with SMTP; 5 Jun 2000 13:16:22 -0000 Received: from cognetnt (1Cust220.tnt5.syd2.da.uu.net [63.34.197.220]) by fep9.mail.ozemail.net (8.9.0/8.6.12) with SMTP id XAA20560 for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 23:16:18 +1000 (EST) From: "Conor MacNeill" To: Subject: RE: Platform independend classpath in build.xml? Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 23:15:12 +1000 Message-ID: <001501bfcef0$14eef220$80dc1fcb@cognet.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <00a701bfcbe6$3aae95e0$93a8a8c0@ii.softwired.ch> X-Spam-Rating: locus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > > Looking from a design or architectual point of you, I totally agree. The > first implementations where closer to what you are suggesting than to what > the current code looks like. It has been built that way to cope > with the way > Ant uses reflection to load and manipulate objects. The way to look at it, > is to write down the desired XML code and than create apropriate objects > implementing the XML, therefor the things need to be called that way. > > Thomas, OK, I understand the genesis of this now. My thought, however, is that you have compromised the object model to cater for the vagaries of the XML parsing. IMHO, that may not be the best approach. Conor