Return-Path: <conor@cortexebusiness.com.au>
Mailing-List: contact user-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list user@ant.apache.org
Received: (qmail 52706 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2003 04:38:18 -0000
Received: from cortex-gw.magna.com.au (HELO smtp.cortexebusiness.com.au)
 (203.174.140.214)
  by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Apr 2003 04:38:18 -0000
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by smtp.cortexebusiness.com.au (8.10.0/8.10.0) id h324cPO13794
	for <user@ant.apache.org>; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 14:38:25 +1000 (EST)
Received: from UNKNOWN(192.168.1.9),
 claiming to be "chunky.int.cortexebusiness.com.au"
 via SMTP by ctx00, id smtpdAAAPTaa7A; Wed Apr  2 14:38:18 2003
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by chunky.int.cortexebusiness.com.au (8.10.0/8.10.0) id h324cK118145
	for <user@ant.apache.org>; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 14:38:20 +1000 (EST)
Received: from kooky.int.cortexebusiness.com.au(192.168.1.48)
 via SMTP by chunky.int.cortexebusiness.com.au, id smtpdAAAnGaOAJ;
 Wed Apr  2 14:38:17 2003
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Conor MacNeill <conor@cortexebusiness.com.au>
To: "Ant Users List" <user@ant.apache.org>
Subject: Re: When is it appropriate to use antcall?
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 15:39:24 +1100
User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3
References: <36824C00FE20D511B80B00D0B747527C027B1787@mail.hothouse.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <36824C00FE20D511B80B00D0B747527C027B1787@mail.hothouse.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-Id: <200304021439.24457.conor@cortexebusiness.com.au>
X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

On Wed, 2 Apr 2003 02:33 pm, Andrew Zeon wrote:
> In "Java development with Ant" by Erik Hatcher and Steve Loughran it says
> excessive use to antcall is the wrong way to use ant. It has an example of
> using the antcall task, but I don't quite understand when it is appropriate
> to use antcall. Can somebody explain?
>
> Thanks.

You should not use <antcall> in place of proper dependency definition. For 
example, this arrangement

<target name="build">
  <antcall target="step1"/>
  <antcall target="step2"/>
  <antcall target="step3"/>
</target>

is more simply expressed as

<target name="build" depends="step1, step2, step3">

The latter is also more maintainable as dependencies change. The first version 
is an attempt to "program" in Ant and is pretty messy.

You generally use antcall where you need to parameterize parts of your build. 
When you use <antcall> is sets up a separate context with its own property 
values. Setting properties in <antcall> does not,. therefore, set properties 
in the main build context.

-- 
Conor MacNeill
Blog: http://codefeed.com/blog/