DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31513>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31513 task dependencies are being executed even if 'if' attribute do not match ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-03 01:21 ------- Very well spoken Steve. I am pleased and I do not really need a new religion (resp. fork). But as Florin as earlier stated, you surly should give an example in the docu (i.e. http://ant.apache.org/manual/using.html#tasks) about the relation of 'if and 'depends'. Especially that all depends task will be executed even when a condition does not met. It is not apparent, as if I would be a high-performant parser, I would be lazy and wouldn't bother with the dependent tasks, when the parent is not executed anyway. Concerning the desired switch for a complete different flow of execution, as Florin earlier had required, I couldn't find in the documentation, either. Only the neglecting of the execution of the interior of a task of one line of flow seems possible. Concerning your example: <target name="if-run" depends="test" if="valid-precondition" > <target name="unless-run" depends="test" unless="valid-precondition" > <target name="inconsistent" depends="check-preconditions,if-run,unless-run" In the blashemous religion the 'test' would have been executed in any case. In my original given example I wanted to run a pre-build test, if I am able to build anyway, so that there wouldn't appear any tasks like compile, smoke-test, distribution in the log. But it is only a minor blemish, no real harm for this very nice product. Thanks for your help, Steve --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
