ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mariusz Nowostawski <mari...@marni.otago.ac.nz>
Subject Re: [PATCH] attempt 2 at javac refactoring.
Date Thu, 21 Dec 2000 01:17:17 GMT

On Thu, 21 Dec 2000, Peter Donald wrote:
> At 09:43  20/12/00 -0500, Jay Glanville wrote:
> >In a previous posting, Stefan B had mentioned that after the AntEater
> >proposal, that submissions had almost dried up.  Well, here is my attempt to
> >add some water to the stream.
> 
> kewl ;)
> 
> >Please accept these changes.  
> 
> they will be accepted ;) thou the last changes would also have been
> accepted aswell ;) 

Cool, please, accept the compiler flag ;o)

Hey! I liked to compiler flag - please, do not ignore me ;o) 
There was only one argument against, that it allows ppl do "nasty" things,
and three voices for: 2 for forcing the use of particular compiler
and 1 for removing "magic" build.compiler property with  
"custom/explicit" properties.  

If there is no compiler flag, how can I "force/suggest" a particular
compiler to be used? With the compiler flag I can, without this flag it is
always up to the user (unless I stop reading .ant.properties file in
the head of my build.xml) 

And, I also think, that old modern and classic compilers should be 
special, I mean, if I set compiler to be jikes, and jikes is not installed
on the user site, current ANT throws an exception. I think more robust
would be to issue a warning, and try to compile with modern, and if this
one is not present either, try classic. Thus it would be great in case of
failure of any "custom" compiler, trying modern then classic.


cheers
Mariusz


Mime
View raw message