ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dominique Devienne <DDevie...@lgc.com>
Subject RE: fail-safe O/S-dependent operations idiom?
Date Thu, 18 Jul 2002 23:02:20 GMT
Humm, OK. I see. At one point I wondered (aloud) whether one should allow a
<propertyset> to refer to an undefined property, and I was leaning on the
side of not allowing it. <condition> sets properties, and to respect
immutability, the property it sets shouldn't exist, right? Thus is wouldn't
work!?!?!? --DD

-----Original Message-----
From: Diane Holt [mailto:holtdl@yahoo.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 5:56 PM
To: Ant Users List
Subject: RE: fail-safe O/S-dependent operations idiom?

--- Dominique Devienne <DDevienne@lgc.com> wrote:
> And Diane, I'm not sure I follow the link between <condition> and
> <propertyset>?

I was just thinking it'd be nice to be able to set more than one property
in a single <condition>, so maybe <condition> could be enhanced to allow
for a nested <propertyset> (but maybe it's not the right thing to use for
that -- dunno, just thinking out loud :)

Diane

=====
(holtdl@yahoo.com)



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes
http://autos.yahoo.com

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:ant-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:ant-user-help@jakarta.apache.org>

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:ant-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:ant-user-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message