ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Magesh Umasankar" <umag...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Vetoes are void? was Re: [VOTE] target-less build files - counting results
Date Wed, 24 Jul 2002 17:09:05 GMT
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <nicolaken@apache.org>
> 
> Listen guys, if we follow the analogy with Java classes, what Peter says 
> make perfect sense.

> Having targetless buildfiles is like having methodless classes with only 
> a static part... I don't know if it's possible in java, but who would 
> ever use it?

It is very much possible in Java to have just 
a static part and nothing else.  Just because 
it doesn't have a "main" method doesn't mean 
that the class's static initializers cannot
be run.  In fact you don't even need to
instantiate the class for its static initializers 
to run.  The default class loader will run the 
static initializers if you just do Class.forName().

Java doesn't mandate that every class must have 
a main method.  Java does not mandate that every 
class must have at least a method.

I fail to understand why we are trying
to draw an analogy between Java - a full
fledged language - and Ant.  If we start going
that route, one can start drawing analogies
between numerous other things like constants 
and variables in Java, anonymous classes,
package names...  Well, you get the idea ;-)

Cheers,
Magesh

*************************************************
*  Committee: Individuals who can do nothing    *
*  individually and sit to decide that nothing  *
*  can be done together.                        *
*************************************************



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:ant-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message