ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Trump <trump.ja...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: task that allows augmentation of previously declared references
Date Fri, 26 Mar 2010 18:57:08 GMT
Hi everybody,

Hope you don't mind a late join to the discussion.

There is some precedent for this kind of thing in Ant -- extension-points.
In fact, extension-points plus appendable paths / filesets is a potent
combination.  You know:

* base script declares a few standard, empty data structures -- paths,
filesets, extension-points
* layered scripts declare contributions to each of these data structures --
add build directories to the downstream classpath, compile targets to the
"build" extension-point, etc

append/prepend isn't as far a departure from the current model as would be
allowing complex expressions or arbitrary transformations.

-jason

On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 1:29 AM, Gilles Scokart <gscokart@gmail.com> wrote:

> I agree with your argumentation about final in java.  But I'm not sure you
> can translate that to ant.
>
> First, I have access to the overwrite method in 1 key in my java IDE.  In
> ant, it might be a little bit more complex.
>
> Secondly, I continue to see ant as a declarative language (although inside
> the target, the ant tasks follow an imperative style).   And in a
> declarative language, it is much more unusual to overwrite/modify the
> declaration.  Immutability has great value in declarative language.
>
>
> Gilles Scokart
>
>
> On 25 March 2010 23:58, Bruce Atherton <bruce@callenish.com> wrote:
>
> > I agree. I see that the intent in such a final attribute is to keep a
> build
> > system understandable at a local level without worrying about what
> external
> > entities might do, but if you feel that way don't use augmentation in
> your
> > build system. The only reasons I use final keyword in programming are
> > security and performance, neither of which apply here. It is too hard to
> > predict where extensibility can prove useful to pre-empt it beforehand.
> >
> > I've tried to figure out a usecase for a final attribute, and the only
> one
> > I can think of is if you have a bunch of generic build files with the
> same
> > target names called from a master build file, and in some instances you
> want
> > the target augmented from the master build file and in some you don't.
> That
> > doesn't sound like it is very compelling for adding the attribute on the
> > first pass of the augment feature.
> >
> >
> > On 25/03/2010 9:23 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> >
> >> On 2010-03-23, Antoine Levy Lambert<antoine@gmx.de>  wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> I prefer not to place any restriction on the<augment/>  feature .
> >>> In fact references currently can be modified by user developed ant
> >>> tasks or script fragments.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> So you say since references can be overridden without augment it doesn't
> >> make any sense to restrict augment?  Sounds reasonable.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
> >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message