In fact I would be even more interested to hear the opinons of both
commiters and non-commiters :).
-Gus
Gus Heck wrote:
Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote:
What you would like would be useful to prevent the "wrong" targets from
being called. But I wonder whether this change would not make ant
unnecessary complex.
The default (atribute omitted) state should behave as always. This is
necessary for back compatability, and to keep the learning curve from
getting too steep. The import task gives me the same sort of worry
about complexity, but I keep reiminding myself... You don't have to
use it if you don't want it ;). So at least from the user side, there
is no obligatory complexity increase. The addition of another atribute
in the documentation for target would be the only brain drain :)...
As for the development side, it may lead to increased complexity if we
add access modifiers with more complex meanings. As it is now, however
the only meaning of public/private is "do we reject it when invoked
from the command line" and the only time we need to check that is
already included in the patch.
I too would be interested to hear what other commiters think.
- Gus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
