ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steve Loughran <stev...@iseran.com>
Subject Re: [GUMP@lsd]: ant/test-ant failed
Date Fri, 20 Feb 2004 10:47:27 GMT
Peter Reilly wrote:
> Antoine Lévy-Lambert wrote:
> 
>> Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 20 Feb 2004, Jan Materne <Jan.Materne@rzf.fin-nrw.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>>> We should get a consensus on how to handle multiple definitions of a
>>>> target inside a buildfile.
>>>>
>>>> 1. multiple targets defined in ONE buildfile is an error, while
>>>> definitions via <import> is correct
>>>>   --> modify the test (more tests)
>>>>   --> modify the sources
>>>> 2. multiple target-defintions are not allowed in general
>>>>   --> modify the sources
>>>> 3. multiple target-defintions ARE allowed in general
>>>>   --> modify the test (expect a simple log statement)
>>>>   
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2 would kill target overrides in import and 3 is plain evil.  My vote
>>> goes for 1.
>>>
>>> Stefan
>>>
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>> I vote for 1 also.
>>
> +1 for 1

I am +1 for option 1, though I do note Gus Heck's point about the merits 
of an override option, though of course that gets controversial in the 
details:

C++ off by default; virtual enables, virtual functions not valid in ctor
Java: on by default; final disables, virtual methods valid in ctor
C#: off by default, override enables, dont know about ctor semantics.

then there is public, private, etc.

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


Mime
View raw message