Return-Path: 
 <ant-dev-return-13796-apmail-jakarta-ant-dev-archive=jakarta.apache.org@jakarta.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-ant-dev-archive@jakarta.apache.org
Received: (qmail 35425 invoked by uid 500); 16 May 2001 14:47:12 -0000
Mailing-List: contact ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
list-help: <mailto:ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:ant-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
list-post: <mailto:ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
Received: (qmail 35102 invoked from network); 16 May 2001 14:47:07 -0000
Message-ID: <626E9D01B882D311B49E00A0C9EBE2E2046740F6@ES01-AUS.bmc.com>
From: "Twiggs, Glenn" <Glenn_Twiggs@bmc.com>
To: "'ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org'" <ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Subject: RE: [RESULT] multithrading
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 09:46:47 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Spam-Rating: h31.sny.collab.net 1.6.2 0/1000/N

I know I'm jumping in on this a bit late, but I think something important
has been overlooked...

In the example below, if the build must run generate THEN compile, you
should define the generate target to depend on the compile target. By fully
defining all your dependencies, you will never need to sequentially execute
targets in the depends list.

This seems like the proper solution to me - no new syntax, no new rules,
just a requirement to use the depends attribute properly. However, Jose's
point about breaking builds probably stands - even if those builds are
incompletely defined ;)

Glenn.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jose Alberto Fernandez [mailto:j_a_fernandez@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 4:06 AM
To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
Subject: RE: [RESULT] multithrading


<<stuff deleted>>

Well, the cold reality is that we do give guarantees that things will be
done sequentially. I think we will be breaking lots of builds if we were to
just change that, unfortunately.

Now, there is no reason to just add a little bit more of new syntax to
diferentiate between sequential-exec-required (",") and
sequential-exec-optional (";" for example). So the target in your example
would be written:

	<target name="build" depends="compile;copy_properties"/>

or you could say:

	<target name="build" depends="generate,compile;copy_properties"/>

which means execute "generate" and "compile" ensuring sequential execution,
and "copy_properties" can be done in any order.

<<more stuff deleted>>

Jose Alberto