ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From d...@multitask.com.au
Subject Re: <import> enhancement, it's done, but do you like how it works?
Date Thu, 11 Jul 2002 07:55:00 GMT
Nicola Ken Barozzi <nicolaken@apache.org> wrote on 07/11/2002 05:00:18 PM:

> As you may have seen, the import tag patch now supports redefining 
> targets  :-)
> 
> Suppose this target:
> 
> <target name="mytarget" depends="a,b,c"><dostuff/></target>
> 
> is in a file that is imported by my buildfile.
> 
> With the patch I can redefine it as follows:
> 
>   <target name="mytarget">
>     <dostuff1/>
>     <antcall target="super.mytarget"/>

Is super.mytarget a 'special' keyword? Given that you're 'redefining' that 
target (mytarget), what does antcalling it do? This is confusing IMHO for 
an end user.

>     <dostuff2/>
>   </target>
> 
> 
> Now, mytarget currently does *not* inherit dependencies, although, 
> having used the same name, it will effectively replace the old version 
> in the graph.
Not inheriting dependencies vs inheriting them should really be a non 
issue. Either it replaces the old one completely or it doesn't, would be 
my take.

> This is the order in which the targets are called, also with the outcome 

> in case we enable dependency inheritance:
> 
>   1 original mytarget:   a->b->c->dostuff
>   2 redefined mytarget:  dostuff1->a->b->c->dostuff->dostuff2
Makes sense.
>   3 dependency inherit:  a->b->c->dostuff1->dostuff->dostuff2
Doesn't make sense.

> IMHO (2) would be the outcome that users think comes out.
> 
> What do you think?
Yip.
--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
Work:      http://www.multitask.com.au
Developers: http://adslgateway.multitask.com.au/developers



Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message