ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Samson, Lyndon [IT]" <lyndon.sam...@ssmb.com>
Subject RE: depends vs. antcall
Date Thu, 28 Jun 2001 14:05:31 GMT
Mebbe

But the depends get called before the content of the task, sometimes you
wanna
set up some stuff first. Like properties or whatever. You get a little more
ability to fine tune using antcall. Ancall can also pass parms which make
procedural thinkers like me happy :-)




-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Donald [mailto:donaldp@apache.org]
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 2:48 PM
To: ant-user@jakarta.apache.org
Subject: Re: depends vs. antcall


On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 23:38, Kyle Adams wrote:
> I've seen both the depends attribute of the target tag, and the antcall
> task used in very similar methods - to call internal targets the comprise
> an external target.  For example:
>
> <target name="all" depends="init, build, deploy, clean">
> </target>
>
> vs.
>
> <target name="all">
>   <antcall target="init" />
>   <antcall target="build" />
>   <antcall target="deploy" />
>   <antcall target="clean" />
> </target>
>
> I've also seen this for the deploy target (to make jar, war, and ear
> files), for the build target (to make directories, compile).  My question
-
> which is the better way of doing this?

Depends is far superior. It doesn't reparse the build files and there is no 
anomalies.


Cheers,

Pete

*-----------------------------------------------------*
| "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, |
| and proving that there is no need to do so - almost |
| everyone gets busy on the proof."                   |
|              - John Kenneth Galbraith               |
*-----------------------------------------------------*

Mime
View raw message