ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <dona...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Scope of Types
Date Sat, 02 Jun 2001 03:30:52 GMT
At 10:06 AM 6/2/01 +1000, Conor MacNeill wrote:
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Peter Donald" <donaldp@apache.org>
>To: <ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
>Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 2:58 AM
>Subject: Re: Scope of Types
>
>
>> At 10:23 PM 6/1/01 +1000, Conor MacNeill wrote:
>> >I support what Peter called Flat (although I would have called it
>> >hierarchical :-). I can access a type defined in a project which I have
>> >"imported" with a projectref
>>
>> what is the use of this for a build file writer?
>>
>
>In the outer project I want to define a value of a type defined in the
>imported project so that I can pass a value to that project. What do you
>think?

Even if you pass the instance the receiver does not need to import the
type. The only reason type needs to be imported is when you use it to
designate an instance. For instance a while back I was advocating datatypes
contained by property tag like

<property name="foo">
  <blee ... >...</blee>
</property>

In this case it would be required that the type "blee" be imported into
this project file. However if we were to pass the ${foo} instance to
another project who just *used* the property (ie assigned it to attributes
or expanded it in a string) then that other project would not need to
import the type.

thoughts?

Cheers,

Pete

*-----------------------------------------------------*
| "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               |
*-----------------------------------------------------*


Mime
View raw message