ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steve Loughran <>
Subject Re: [AntUnit] Is extending ConditionBase really that bad?
Date Wed, 13 Sep 2006 20:22:10 GMT
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> Hi,
> as I stated in another thread, I don't feel bad for extending
> ConditionBase but if a majority here would prefer AsserTask to stick
> with a simple add(Condition) in a task derived class, I'd be up for it
> as well.  I'd only want to see this straightened out before we release
> the first AntUnit beta, which is why I'll try drive this to a closure
> pretty quickly.
> Can we have a little poll here, please:
> (1) Would you prefer a version of AssertTask that didn't extend
>     ConditionBase?

0. I extend it sometimes too.

> If so
> (2) Would you want AntUnit to silently typedef all existing conditions
>     into the AntUnit namespace?  People wouldn't even notice.

+1, if (1) is true

>     or
>     Would you prefer users to explicitly use an antlib to use the
>     existing core conditions?

no. you break my existing code and my forthcoming book.

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

View raw message