ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dominique Devienne" <ddevie...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: PropertyHelper thoughts
Date Fri, 15 Jun 2007 19:08:23 GMT
On 6/15/07, Matt Benson <gudnabrsam@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I am actively working on this as we speak, actually,
> and I'm pleased so far with my results.

FTR Matt, I still haven't read anything to convince me that write
access via <property> is desirable, needed, and good. I'm not trying
to put a damper on your efforts, but so far the use cases I've seen
for "write" are better handled by custom tasks.

What about the <*ant> tasks? These "things" which are not string
properties, how do they percolate to sub-Projects? We have clear
semantic for properties and references passing, so it would be much
clearer and "The Ant Way"(tm) to have them as references, manipulated
using custom tasks, and passed using reference semantic, and which
unlike properties are not fully compartmented between Projects, which
the parent and child project share the same referenced-object.

Would installed PH instanced percolate to sub-Project automatically?
Because if they do, Peter's argument that the explicit declaration of
the PH ensures BC falls flat if one uses "external" reusable build
files which would happen to use the same syntax as the PH prefix
installed in another build file. That would be bad encapsulation.

So the more I think about this, the more I feel it's wrong at several level.

Let's stick with read access. As toString: demonstrates already,
what's to the right of the PH scheme doesn't have to reference a
property name, so it's flexible enough. --DD

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


Mime
View raw message