xml-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ian Holsman <apachexmlgene...@holsman.net>
Subject Re: [Proposal] Creation of the Apache XML "Ant" Project
Date Mon, 15 Nov 1999 22:34:06 GMT
Traditionaly it is 'hard' to come up with a makefile for a java project,
due to the complex dependancy checking requirements that java  imposes.
what you end up with a 'makefile' is stuff that just does a javac *.java in a
directory, which is not necessarily
what you want.

Using ANT on my own projects I find it very easy to use and to setup, and

..Start the Flames..

James Duncan Davidson wrote:

> > Unlike C and C++ we have few -D define like construct's, etc, etc as java
> > is platform independent enough. So why not stick to simple make ? We could
> > get away with just an exported MAKE, RM, CP, JAVAC, JAR and CLASSPATH
> > variable. If you keep all relative live stays simple. No ../includes
> > needed either :-).
> Your assuming that simple make runs everywhere..... Or that I want to
> pull down cygwin for my PC (which crashes on win98) or that I've got a
> good solution when running on my macintosh. If the world was just unix,
> then we'd all be happier programmers. :)
> > I am not so sure this reinvent-ed wheel (in java this time) is going
> > to be that much rounder and better.
> >
> > All I see is buzzword compliancy and general coolness sofar.
> I can understand where you are coming from. Many many people on my team
> here weren't keen on the idea at first. Then they used it, played with
> it, saw how it worked, and now they are bigger proponents of it than I
> am.
> One thing that it does better than make right out of the box for Java
> based projects -- set a javac task with a src dir and a dest dir and it
> will crawl the src directory, gather up every java file that needs to be
> compiled, and compile it in one fell swoop. Right there you get a speed
> increase. And a maintenance boost in that you don't have to call out
> every little java file that needs to be compiled. Furthermore, you don't
> have to worry about each package being built in the correct order.
> Another data point -- even if you do run cygwin on the PC, if you do
> *lots* of individual execs (which is what each of those javac, cp, mv,
> etc calls do), you're performance stinks as Windows wasn't designed to
> support the many little tools concept. Ant runs everything in process.
> There is a hook (not done yet) which will allow arbitray execs to happen
> on a specific platform, but for building Tomcat we haven't needed it
> yet.
> I don't want to replace make in the c/c++ world -- I'm just trying to
> make a better solution for Java. Look at the equivalent in Perl -- they
> use make maker to do things which, for perl on perl's platforms, is a
> much better solution. This is a similar thought (though a much different
> execution).
> Pull down tomcat from the Jakarta trees. Run a build. Look at how the
> build.xml file is configured. Then make a judgment as to it's roundness.
> That's all I ask. :)
> Now, as far as whether or not it should move from Jakarta to
> XML.apache.org, that's a different question. It started out in Jakarta
> land (well, actually it started out 30,000 feet over the atlantic, but
> that's another story). It can stay there, or move depending on where
> people see it should be. I'll be fully engaged on it wherever it is.
> But, it is a more general technology than servlets and it exercises XML
> quite well.
> .duncan

View raw message