Mailing-List: contact dev-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Ant Developers List" <dev@ant.apache.org>
Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <42F923C0.2040703@apache.org>
Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2005 22:44:32 +0100
From: Steve Loughran <stevel@apache.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ant Developers List <dev@ant.apache.org>
Subject: Re: programmatically creating and marshalling antfiles
References: <EA9D95F907E2924A9A32F274114BCDEF590C2E@perth.Cellectivity.local>
 <42F77BFF.4090700@well.com>
In-Reply-To: <42F77BFF.4090700@well.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Jack Woehr wrote:
> Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
> 
>> One of the problems here is that it is not always possible
>> to reconstruct the XML for a particular TASK. That is,
>> tasks MUST have setXXX methods for every attribute, but there is
>> no requirement that they provide a corresponding getXXX.
>> Simillar for createXXXX, addXXXX, etc.
>>
>> Hence there is no way to given objects created programatically
>> to get back what the settings for those objects are.
>>  
>>
> True, but the process does take place in Antidote, so the back end ...
> the output stage ... of such a task ("WriteProject" ?) is already coded.
> 
> As for getXXX() .. backing in such a function sounds like a sweep of the 
> tasks,
> but a clean sweep.
> 

Even if you could retro-fit every task out there with getters,
  -what about overloaded set operatons? which one should the get return?
  -what about property assignments. Tasks get their setters with 
properties expanded.


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