> Everyone is entitled to your opinion, and everyone else is
> entitled to
> their own, wrong opinion. Right, Dominique? ;^)
>
> Just to be contrarian (but not really), the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" notation
> looks weird to
> me! "@{x}" is familiar enough, although I can't say why at
> the momen
LOL!
This got the office rolling on the floor.
> -Original Message-
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 11:40 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] macrodef - do attributes as properties or
> substitutio
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003, Ken Gentle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "@{x}" is familiar enough, although I can't say why at the moment
It's a grid bug (or a xorn, dunno without colors) between a moat and a
fountain with an adventurer/human/elf next to it.
8-)
Stefan
---
On Wednesday 19 November 2003 16:13, Ken Gentle wrote:
>
> Just to be contrarian (but not really), the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" notation
> looks weird to
> me! "@{x}" is familiar enough, although I can't say why at the moment --
> oh, yeah, doesn't Perl have a similar construct?
If not today then some
Everyone is entitled to your opinion, and everyone else is entitled to
their own, wrong opinion. Right, Dominique? ;^)
Just to be contrarian (but not really), the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" notation looks weird to
me! "@{x}" is familiar enough, although I can't say why at the moment --
oh, yeah, doe
> From: Jose Alberto Fernandez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > From: Gus Heck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > My (non-committer) oppion coincides with Stefan here, with a slight
> > preference for @{x}
> > because it looks like "put the substitution AT this location" when I
> > read it to myself.
> >
> -Original Message-
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 2:08 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] macrodef - do attributes as properties or
> substitutions
>
> > [ ] as $(x)
> > [ ] as @{x}
>
> either one works for me - as we
> >>If macrodef attribute are to be implements as substitutions, what
> >>should be the notation? (where x is the attribute name)
> >>
> >
> > [ ] as ${x} (look like ant properties) confusion with 'real'
> > properties
> > [ ] as $(x) to close to A
> > [
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If macrodef attribute are to be implements as substitutions, what
should be the notation? (where x is the attribute name)
[ ] as ${x} (look like ant properties) confusion with 'real'
properties
[ ] as $(x) to close to A
[ ] as @x
> If macrodef attribute are to be implements as substitutions, what
> should be the notation? (where x is the attribute name)
>
[ ] as ${x} (look like ant properties) confusion with 'real'
properties
[ ] as $(x) to close to A
[ ] as @x
I know that Canoo WebTest uses %{x} as its own variable substitution.
> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Cohen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 12:50 PM
> To: Ant Developers List
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] macrodef - do attributes as properties or
> substitutions
>
>
> From: peter reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> If macrodef attribute are to be implements as substitutions, what
> should be the notation? (where x is the attribute name)
>
> [ ] as ${x} (look like ant properties)
> [ ] as $(x)
> [ ] as @x
> [ ] as ${attribute:x}
> [ ] as @{x}
> [X] some
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> OK, how do we want to implement attributes:
>
> [X] as textual substitution
> [ ] as "real" Ant properties
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e
> OK, how do we want to implement attributes:
[ ] as textual substitution
[X] as "real" Ant properties
Jan
14 matches
Mail list logo
