ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <>
Subject Re: TASTE QUESTION: optional description attribute for ant projects?
Date Wed, 11 Apr 2001 22:34:55 GMT
At 11:40  11/4/01 +1000, Conor MacNeill wrote:
>From: "Peter Donald" <>
>To: <>
>Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2001 11:28 PM
>Subject: Re: TASTE QUESTION: optional description attribute for ant
>> What about putting it in a comment directly before the relevent element?
>> (Or maybe this could be just for ant2). This works like the javadoc
>> semi-illiterate style and should be familiar to most. (Besides it doesn't
>> require no magic element names but can still contain a chunk of text).
>In general I prefer to be explicit. Why overload a comment with another
>function when we can have an element to contain the text. Javadoc doesn't
>really do that since it uses a special comment delimiter. Anyway, such an
>element is no more a magic element than <target> and <property> are now. Is
>there a reason why we want to avoid new elements under project?

hundreds of good reasons ;)

However more importantly is the fact that we will eventually want to doc
targets or tasks etc. It would be better if there was a consistent doccing
standard. To achieve this you can easily and transparently use comments or
alternatively use magic element names throughout the build.xml. (Or wait
till an2 and use namespaces).



| "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, |
| and proving that there is no need to do so - almost |
| everyone gets busy on the proof."                   |
|              - John Kenneth Galbraith               |

View raw message