Mailing-List: contact ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Message-ID: <20000913082222.25449.qmail@web121.yahoomail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 01:22:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Diane Holt <holtdl@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Couple of mods to <javac>
To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org, donaldp@mad.scientist.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

--- donaldp@mad.scientist.com wrote:
> This may be a dumb question - but why don't you just package
> them in appropriate package ?

Because then they -would- be connected to each other, and they shouldn't
be, since they're really not. Also, then the compiler -would- put the
classfiles into the package subdir hierarchy, and they really don't belong
there, because a) they really aren't any kind of package, and b) it would
actually complicate, not simplify, things. I thought just having <javac>
handle this case would be the simple way, since you'd only ever ask for it
to "flatten" for targets where you needed it, so it's not like it would
get in the way of anything normal. I really hadn't expected it to be
controversial at all. (If anything, I thought the quite possibly odd way I
implemented it would be, since I don't know Java and so have no way of
knowing if how I did it is actually correct. I was fully prepared to have
people say I'd done the actual coding goofy and here's the right way,
which would've been fine with me. But I wasn't expecting it to be a Java
philosophy issue.)

> you can write your own logger

I really don't need a whole different logger -- I just need that "lSep"
taken out of line 153. :)

> However I would like to see a quiter version of logger as
> default too :P

Cool -- that makes 2 votes in favor (if you count mine -- and if by
quieter you mean less spaced out :)

Diane

=====
(holtdl@yahoo.com)


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/