ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Benson <>
Subject Re: References
Date Tue, 12 Apr 2005 12:20:45 GMT

--- Conor MacNeill <> wrote:
> I support moving reference processing into the core.
> This is how mutant 
> worked. It is certainly a core responsibility.
> It should only be done for addXXX methods. By the
> core-task contract 
> those are the elements for which the task has given
> the core the 
> responsibility for creating the element instance.
> For createXXX, the 
> task is saying that it is in control and it needs to
> do its own refid 
> processing.

So the rule becomes, "when writing a custom type, IF
you extend DataType, and IF those who program to your
custom type only use addXXX and/or add(Type), then the
refid attribute will be handled for you
automatically."  That's all well and good, but
basically I don't see what it gains us.  In a rewrite
I think it would be possible to have everything a form
of add() or addXXX(), the latter serving only to give
a specific element name to an instantiable type.  But
given the responsibility of supporting all historical
subelement creation patterns I don't see that
reference processing in the core stops authors of new
DataTypes (including us) having to support refid
through code.  I'd love to be wrong, though.


> Conor
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message