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 39466 invoked from network); 10 Jan 2001 01:06:04 -0000 Received: from femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (24.0.95.84) by h31.sny.collab.net with SMTP; 10 Jan 2001 01:06:04 -0000 Received: from alsatian ([24.18.23.12]) by femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP id <20010110010408.PHIM3375.femail4.sdc1.sfba.home.com@alsatian>; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 17:04:08 -0800 Message-ID: <07fb01c07aa1$82a1d0a0$020a0a0a@alsatian> From: "Jason Rosenberg" To: , References: <20010109222919.30951.qmail@web9305.mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: The RIGHT Direction for ANT (was Re: Problem using script task) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 20:04:02 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-Spam-Rating: h31.sny.collab.net 1.6.2 0/1000/N ----- Original Message ----- From: "Roger Vaughn" To: Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 5:29 PM Subject: Re: The RIGHT Direction for ANT (was Re: Problem using script task) > > Probably the biggest flaw in your argument is to > > have > > lumped together Make and Ant as equivalents. Ant > > is clearly much easier and much more powerful and > > much more portable than Make. That's why Ant is > > attractive. It has little to do with dependency > > tracking. > > I have to defend Jerry here - this smacks too much of > the "newer is always better" thought. Make is better > than Ant - in certain circumstances. Try building C > programs with Ant and you'll see what I mean. I will > agree that Ant is far, far better than Make at > building most Java programs. > Well, perhaps you are right, since I haven't tried using Ant for C, and I haven't ever tried to use Make for Java. But for Java, Ant is the way. > As for your templating approach, give XSLT a try > instead of scripting. It's very powerful for this > use, and has the huge advantage of expressing your > build files in only one language - XML. With XSLT, > you can define new tags for all kinds of things - even > for generating multiple Ant targets, for standard > property init sections, for standard target sets, etc. > Can someone post some examples of Ant templatiing done via XSLT. From what I've seen of XSL, it is generally cryptic and not very human readable. Javascript, and Ant XML, are both very intuitive and easy to read.