ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Klaus Malorny <>
Subject Re: AW: AW: extended parallelism
Date Tue, 18 Dec 2007 11:54:57 GMT wrote:

> Oh, have to have a look at that. If I change the semantic this has to be
> made explicit ...
> (It can be done because you have to specify the executor for your own
> ...)
> "Ant tries to execute the targets in the depends attribute in the order
> they appear (from left to right)." [1].
> Ant 'tries' - so I wouldnt rely on that ... ;)
> Especially if you read the example direclty under that: the order doesnt
> matter if the dependend targets have dependencies for their own.
> The note about the "init" target is an old one - not invalid, but no
> more needed: you can place tasks directly under <project> (since 1.6).
> The next two sentences "always first element in depends clause" + "in
> the depends clause of each target" are redundant: if I specify that init
> in each target, it does not matter where I put it in the depends-list.
> Target.setDepends(String s): (basically)
>   List deps;
>   for(String s2 : s.split(",")) {
>     deps.add(s2);
>   }
> Manual is not clear (as clear in a "specification") but the code sais
> that there is an order.
> So I would just document that. It is the users possibility of using the
> executor or not.
> Or do you have another idea for parallelizing?
> Jan

Well, I just tried the following:

<project name="test">
   <target name="a" depends="b, c">

   <target name="b" depends="c">

   <target name="c">

Target b changes the the order of the execution defined in a, i.e. c-b-a is 
executed. So it seems that the order is simply a suggestion, but not a mandatory 
condition. This would mean that your approach of parallelizing targets would be 
valid, but I wouldn't bet that nobody would get problems with their existing 
build files.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message