ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Promotion of FilterReaders proposal to main development tree.
Date Thu, 28 Feb 2002 03:30:11 GMT
I have the following comments:

- Parametrizable/Parameter. Ant already have a clear ( and pretty good ) 
set of rules for setting properties in java objects, using introspection, 
etc. There is no need to introduce this concept, using the same mechanism 
as for tasks should be enough.

- AntFilterReader - I prefer a more generic mechanism. What it does is
'wrap' a into an ant datatype. The same thing can
 be better achieved in a generic way - using a TypeAdapter ( similar
with TaskAdapter ). <antlib> proposal ( and my proposed refactoring
of Task/Type management ) would provide this - all you have to do
to add the filter is use a typedef ( and that'll take care of 
automatic property setting using introspection - so no need for
Parameter ).

- I _love_ your aproach of extending a interface !! 
On that alone you have my +1 ( if you remove the Parametrizable
and let the filters be simple beans, with no deps on ant - 
none is needed !).

I'll add more comments as I read the code, but so far 
filters/ are fine ( without Parametrizable ). If you agree
to use <antlib> or an extended <typdef>, most of what 
you added in types/ will not be needed, and you can 
group ChainFilterHelper ( which is not likely to be 
used outside your package ) with the FilterReader type.


Your first example will no longer be needed, a <typedef> or 
<antlib> will be enough to elimnate the need to use the full 
class name and <param> 

>         <filterreader
> classname="">
>             <param type="comment" value="//"/>
>             <param type="comment" value="REM "/>
>             <param type="comment" value="--"/>
>         </filterreader>

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

View raw message