ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <>
Subject Re: <ant>
Date Sun, 24 Feb 2002 05:06:45 GMT
On Sun, 24 Feb 2002 15:33, Steve Loughran wrote:
> > -1
> >
> > I know people who use it with antcalls as a fallback. At one stage some
> > of the Avalon build files also used it. I think it is an ugly hack but
> > unfortunately it is here to stay now ;(
> oh I see, so they can use it as an explicit default. Ugly. ugly ugly. Why
> is avalon always on the cutting edge of build file abuse :-)

I prefer to think of it as pushing the bounds of the technology bubble ;)

> How do you propose we specify in ant 1.x that the target attribute of the
> <ant> task should refer to the default of the project?

Not sure. All my build files contain a target named "main" that is always the 
default target so I always specify that as property value prior to antcall if 
I want that behaviour.

> Presumably these targets were added so that if you invoked the build file
> with the target attribute bound to an empty property, the "" target was
> executed instead. I am proposing formalising that with an invocation of the
> empty target mapping to calling default.

unfortunately thats different from current behaviour. The "" actually was 
used to do something different. In a few cases that I am aware of its use, 
the purpose was to display a message saying "You forgot to set the property 
you ninny!". In other cases it had different behaviour from the main target.

> > > for a target. I think not, if we agree then we can stop it, and then I
> > > could set <ant target=""> to mean default.
> >
> > definetly for ant2.
> well in that case ant1.x should issue a warning whenever a build file
> target of a tenuous name ("", "," ...) is declared, cos it is unlikely that
> they will work in ant2, 




"abandon all hope , ye who enter here" - dante, inferno

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message