Return-Path: 
 <dev-return-48824-apmail-ant-dev-archive=ant.apache.org@ant.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-ant-dev-archive@ant.apache.org
Received: (qmail 7993 invoked by uid 500); 30 Jul 2003 10:33:43 -0000
Mailing-List: contact dev-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:dev-subscribe@ant.apache.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-help@ant.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@ant.apache.org>
List-Id: "Ant Developers List" <dev.ant.apache.org>
Reply-To: "Ant Developers List" <dev@ant.apache.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list dev@ant.apache.org
Received: (qmail 7982 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2003 10:33:42 -0000
Received: from mail.paranor.ch (HELO nts?par1.paranor.ch) (195.65.4.180)
  by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 30 Jul 2003 10:33:42 -0000
Received: by nts_par1.paranor.ch with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
	id <3SL6CH2V>; Wed, 30 Jul 2003 10:48:08 +0200
Message-ID: <36E996B162DAD111B6AF0000F879AD1A76C327@nts_par1.paranor.ch>
From: "Wannheden, Knut" <knut.wannheden@paranor.ch>
To: 'Ant Developers List' <dev@ant.apache.org>
Subject: RE: FileUtils#normalize(File)
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 10:48:03 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C35677.4C2F7482"
X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

------_=_NextPart_001_01C35677.4C2F7482
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

> > For VMS I intend to add a method FileUtils#toVMSPath(File):String.
> > I was just thinking if a more generic
> > FileUtils#toOSPath(File):String would make sense.  What do you
> > think?
> 
> There currently is no need for it except in the OpenVMS case, we could
> add toOSPAth later IMHO.
> 

On the downside a FileUtils#toVMSPath(File) would push the OS awareness
responsibility up a level, in which case Commandline.Argument.setFile(File)
would have to check for OpenVMS and call this method.  Or is this the wrong
place altogether for the OpenVMS specific code of <exec> and <apply>?

> > Another question: Now that Java 1.2 will be required, do you intend
> > to refactor the code to use the new Java 1.2 classes and change code
> > which now uses reflection to access some of the Java 1.2 methods?
> 
> Gradually, when you are working on FileUtils anyway, this would be a
> good time to do it.
> 

I was thinking about the FileUtils#getSetLastModified(), which using
reflection returns the File#setLastModified(long) method.  Alas, I found
that exactly this method doesn't have any effect on OpenVMS :-(

Cheers,

--
knut

------_=_NextPart_001_01C35677.4C2F7482--