ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dominique Devienne <DDevie...@lgc.com>
Subject RE: DispatchTask
Date Sun, 06 Jun 2004 17:50:23 GMT
> From: Magesh Umasankar [mailto:umagesh@apache.org]
> 
> > public static void dispatchAction(String action, Task target) { ... }
> >
> > When it can be avoided, I prefer to keep my single inheritance
> > choices open. --DD
> 
> Nice idea.  I was thinking of the following:

So if I need to derive from something else that DispatchTask, I can simply
implement Dispatchable and don't even need an execute method, since you've
modified the introspection code too. Clever!

The only small concern I have with the impl is that, unless I've misread the
code, if the parameter in question is unspecified or empty (white space
only), the new code as of now still executes execute(), which would do
nothing silently, instead of barfing. I personally believe any dispatch task
should require a valid 'action' attribute, and that having a default action
reverting back to execute is counter intuitive and will lead to some
confusion (and requests for help) down the line.

Let me know what you think about that. Thanks, --DD

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


Mime
View raw message