On 2/13/2012 2:55 PM, Jesse Glick wrote:
On 02/13/2012 01:25 PM, Bruce Atherton wrote:
could Java 7 and NIO 2.0 be a good reason to create Ant 2.0?
While the new java.nio.file.* APIs are indeed valuable for a tool like
Ant, I hardly think a fork or major rewrite is required to take
advanta
On 2/14/2012 6:13 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
This will lead us to the discussion of what Ant2 would be. A rewritten
Ant that remains compatible (or mostly so) on the build file level or
something quite different?
My opinion.
I think we need at least an option for being backwards compatible a
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 8:13 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On 2012-02-13, Bruce Atherton wrote:
>
>> I spent some time starting to implement a very simple (only a few
>> tasks) new version of Ant that started from Java 7. Personal issues
>> have taken me out of the game for a while, but I've still b
On 02/14/2012 07:39 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
Most likely you don't want double expansion in most cases.
Right, but how often would you even notice the difference? Usually property values do not themselves contain interpolable variables, as seen by the fact that this problem
has just been repo
On 2012-02-13, Bruce Atherton wrote:
> I spent some time starting to implement a very simple (only a few
> tasks) new version of Ant that started from Java 7. Personal issues
> have taken me out of the game for a while, but I've still been
> wondering, could Java 7 and NIO 2.0 be a good reason to
On 2012-02-14, Vimil Saju wrote:
> Your help is very much appreciated. Would using a custom
> CommandLauncher make it possible for all the built-in ant tasks that
> support fork attribute to use it.
Right now Execute uses a static CommandLauncher instance which is
initialize inside the static in
Thanks Stefan,
Your help is very much appreciated. Would using a custom CommandLauncher make
it possible for all the built-in ant tasks that support fork attribute to use
it.
I was thinking of an approach similar to how ant allows property expansion to
be customized. By just adding our own cu
On 2012-02-12, Vimil Saju wrote:
> So I thought of somehow extending the 'Execute' class of ant to use
> the functionality of this 3rd party library, but I find that its
> difficult if not impossible to extend this class.
It has certainly not been designed for this, no.
> Is it possible to make
On 2012-02-12, Jesse Glick wrote:
> On 02/12/2012 05:13 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>> I'm not sure whether the macrodef writer will always know whether she
>> wants double-expansion or not.
> I would say that if you come across a problem like that mentioned in
> #42046 then you know you do not wa
