ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Benson <gudnabr...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Proposal] Capture attributes in unknown namespaces
Date Thu, 24 Jun 2010 20:26:15 GMT

On Jun 24, 2010, at 3:04 PM, Danny Yates wrote:

> Hmm... that's interesting. I hadn't discovered that before. It's not clear
> to me what that does - it appears to manipulate the DOM somehow.
> 
> Could you explain what it's for and how to use it and then I can see if it
> will help me solve my current problem.
> 

Admittedly, I didn't read the entire message to see _what_ you wanted namespaced attributes
for.  :)  The Dynamic* interfaces are more for custom tasks, etc.  I could swear we've had
a similar discussion about putting attributes on Targets before; at the very least you could
create a custom ProjectHelper that instantiated a particular Target subclass.  One of our
committers, Alexey Solofnenko, was once working on a parallel executor, but I don't know whether
he ever completed it.

-Matt

> Many thanks,
> 
> Danny.
> 
> 
> On 24 June 2010 20:58, Matt Benson <gudnabrsam@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Like org.apache.tools.ant.Dynamic*NS?
>> 
>> -Matt
>> 
>> On Jun 24, 2010, at 2:50 PM, Danny Yates wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi guys,
>>> 
>>> Me again!
>>> 
>>> I have some more functionality that I'm interested in, but I fear it may
>> be
>>> quite specific to my requirements, so I thought I'd run it past you all
>>> before getting to work on it.
>>> 
>>> I'm developing a custom executor which can execute targets in parallel,
>> and
>>> as an extension of that, it would be kind of cool to be able to mark
>>> individual targets as CPU-bound or IO-bound so that the executor can be a
>>> bit smarter about scheduling them. However, I can't find any sensible way
>> to
>>> communicate this information to the executor.
>>> 
>>> What would be kind of cool would be that if the parser encounters
>> attributes
>>> in a namespace that it doesn't recognise, then instead of ignoring them
>> (as
>>> it does now), it records them and makes them available through an API on
>> the
>>> Project and Target objects. This would allow the executor to inspect
>> them.
>>> 
>>> I realise this is very specific to my parallel executor project, but I
>> think
>>> adding it would be a non-breaking change that wouldn't have any impact on
>>> existing consumers of the API.
>>> 
>>> What do you folks think?
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> 
>>> Danny.
>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
>> 
>> 


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


Mime
View raw message