ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <dona...@locus.apache.org>
Subject Re: Role of scripts [was Re: increment task]
Date Fri, 27 Oct 2000 00:26:49 GMT
At 12:04  26/10/00 -0700, you wrote:
>At 2:41 PM -0400 10/26/2000, Sam Ruby/Raleigh/IBM wrote:
>>Ken Wood wrote:
>>>
>>>  It was designed to be a JAVA program to build
>>>  java. It was designed to be extended using
>>>  java because that was the original CONCEPT
>>
>>Have you talked to the original author?  I have.
>>
>>The original concept was language independent.  The implementation and the
>>first set of tasks were written in Java because that's what James Duncan
>>Davidson needed at the time.
>>
>>James, Stefano, myself or the others at the time would have no objections
>>to Ant being extended by COBOL or LISP or whatever.
>>
>>What everybody didn't want was for the Ant language itself (by this, I mean
>>the XML grammar) to become yet another programming language.
>
>In my opinion, all of the built in tasks provided by Ant *DO* define 
>a programming language of a sort. At various times in the past, I've 
>asked for a way to define tasks within ant itself.
>
>For example, I have a fixed set of operations that I do to build 
>tools for JShell, that I encapsulate in a simple build script, 
>buildtool. Now, I can probably execute this by just using the <exec> 
>task, and running my original script, but then I lose the power of 
>using ant to control compilation, etc. What I've asked for in the 
>past is the ability to define compound tasks, built from existing 
>tasks. So, my buildtool task would be made up of <javac>, <jlink> and 
><copy>. Given this capability, abstraction, Ant truly becomes a 
>programming language, and why be against that?
>
>If I can also build task definitions using scripts, then so much the 
>better. Why not allow as many extension mechanisms as possible?

because we could end up with a perl. In perl every task can be done at
least  3 different ways and some constructs can be done 15 different ways
!!!! It is any wonder that many people find perl hard to use.

One of the aims of ant is simplicity. I don't want to have to think while
building build.xml files ;) I am not saying I oppose definigng scripts via
scripting I am still not sure in that case 



Cheers,

Pete

*------------------------------------------------------*
| "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want |
| to test a man's character, give him power."          |
|       -Abraham Lincoln                               |
*------------------------------------------------------*

Mime
View raw message