Gus Heck wrote, On 25/08/2003 18.02:
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote, On 22/08/2003 14.58:
From: Gus Heck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
If macro definitions are available to sub builds, then your 3rd case
might occur, but I don't think it would be good to allow macros to
b
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
[returned from holiday, happy to read the list again :-) ]
Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote, On 22/08/2003 14.58:
From: Gus Heck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
If macro definitions are available to sub builds, then your 3rd case
might occur, but I don't think it would be goo
Templates appear to be something new, though I don't think I
like them
(see below)
(1) --> ${xyz}
(2) --> ${macroattr:xyz}
(3) --> ${macrotemplate:xyz}
Well, as I said I use those terms above just as examples, I am not
hookup in words,
I was just looking for some identifier to desc
[returned from holiday, happy to read the list again :-) ]
Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote, On 22/08/2003 14.58:
From: Gus Heck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
If macro definitions are available to sub builds, then your 3rd case
might occur, but I don't think it would be good to allow macros to be
ca
> From: Gus Heck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I'm not sure I buy your 3 things argument. In my mind there
> are 2 things
> in what is previously proposed...
>
> properties and parameters
>
The question is when expantions happen. We are here in the MACRO
world, and in that world there are us
I'm not sure I buy your 3 things argument. In my mind there are 2 things
in what is previously proposed...
properties and parameters
Templates appear to be something new, though I don't think I like them
(see below)
(1) --> ${xyz}
(2) --> ${macroattr:xyz}
(3) --> ${macrotemplate:xyz}
So for
> -Original Message-
> From: Jose Alberto Fernandez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2003 5:56 AM
> To: Ant Developers List
> Subject: RE: [new tasks] presetdef and macrodef
>
> I have no big issue on which syntax is used on each case, but I
> From: Gus Heck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
>
> >Dominique,
> >
> >As its name indicates is a MACRO. And macros are
> macros are
> >macros and they are suppose to be textually replaces at the point on
> >invocation.
> >
> >
> Of course the parameters need to
rd expansion of Ant
> properties. This is non-bidding of course, as I am not a committer... --DD
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Jose Alberto Fernandez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003 7:34 AM
> > To: Ant Developers List
> > Su
Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
Dominique,
As its name indicates is a MACRO. And macros are macros are
macros
and they are suppose to be textually replaces at the point on
invocation.
Of course the parameters need to be replaced. The point is they
shouldn't look like properties. This way they ca
I stopped arguing this point, as I was the only one concerned apparently,
but since Jose Alberto brings it up again...
Having ${NAME} not evaluate to the value, if any, of the NAME property, at
the time the task it's used in ( is this case) is executed, is
REALLY REALLY BAD in my sincere opinion.
y "x" to be substituted
> at definition time
> while ${x} will get substituted at expansion time.
>
>
> > -Original Message-----
> > From: Dominique Devienne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: 19 August 2003 21:24
> > To: 'Ant Developers List&#x
OTECTED]
> Sent: 19 August 2003 21:24
> To: 'Ant Developers List'
> Subject: RE: [new tasks] presetdef and macrodef
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Jose Alberto Fernandez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 12:47
> -Original Message-
> From: Jose Alberto Fernandez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 12:47 PM
> To: Ant Developers List
> Subject: RE: [new tasks] presetdef and macrodef
>
> > What I am saying is that even with a different notation fo
> From: peter reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> On Thursday 14 August 2003 17:44, Dominique Devienne wrote:
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: peter reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> >
> > >
> > > All of the expansions happen later on. If the macro is used in a
> > > different
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, Knut Wannheden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Or maybe s could even be inherited when using or
> ?
My understanding is that defines a new task, so it is
inherited with <*ant*>subbuilds.
Stefan
-
To unsubsc
> >
> > One thing you could do here is redefine itself
> > by doing something like:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > which would realize your desired effect. This could be done internally
> > by when for example no name attribute is given.
>
> This could also be done by:
>
>
>
>
On Thursday 14 August 2003 18:50, Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
> I think this is fantastic work.
Thanks.
>
> One thing you could do here is redefine itself
> by doing something like:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> which would realize your desired effect. This could be done internally
> by when
On Thursday 14 August 2003 17:44, Dominique Devienne wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: peter reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 11:22 AM
> > To: Ant Developers List
> > Subject: Re: [new tasks] presetdef and macrodef
Dominique Devienne wrote, On 14/08/2003 20.16:
Jose Alberto answered that one indirectly. I know understand that the
I had does not declare a 'name' or 'classname' attribute, and
thus could not be used as I wrote it, whereas keeps access to
all attributes of the preset'd type. Sorry for being so
> -Original Message-
> From: Dominique Devienne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 11:44 AM
> To: 'Ant Developers List'
> Subject: RE: [new tasks] presetdef and macrodef
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: peter reilly [mail
I think this is fantastic work.
As per Dominique's reservations, here are some observations that may
make things easier.
> From: Dominique Devienne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > From: peter reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> > (formally known as extendtype)
> > this defines a new t
> -Original Message-
> From: peter reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 11:22 AM
> To: Ant Developers List
> Subject: Re: [new tasks] presetdef and macrodef
>
> It is not a sub-set of . But there is a lot of overlap of
> functional
On Thursday 14 August 2003 15:23, Dominique Devienne wrote:
> After all the praises, I hope my post doesn't sound too negative.
No problem.
> I also
> think it's a great addition Peter, I just have a few reservations ;-)
>
> See below... --DD
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: peter reilly
After all the praises, I hope my post doesn't sound too negative. I also
think it's a great addition Peter, I just have a few reservations ;-)
See below... --DD
> -Original Message-
> From: peter reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> (formally known as extendtype)
> this defines a n
The following tasks will be an excellent addition for the use Centipede
does of Ant, so it's a big thumbs up!
Presetdef can be used to redefine the most used Ant tasks adding the
defaults taken from the descriptor we use.
macrodef can make us finally create real macros that are not only
target
On Thursday 14 August 2003 12:28, Knut Wannheden wrote:
>
> A question: is a special task in the sense that it seems to be
> able to suppress Ant from resolving properties for it when the task is
> evaluated? Is there a mechanism which allows this to be done in custom
> tasks as well?
The trick
t: Thursday, August 14, 2003 1:28 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [new tasks] presetdef and macrodef
>
>
> On Thu, 14 Aug 2003, peter reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Will I place these tasks in ant or ant-contrib ?
>
> Ant, they sound very use
This looks excellent! It makes Ant a lot more flexible, but at the same
time also more compilcated to use. Buildfiles with (possibly nested)
s and s could be a lot harder to understand and
maintain. But if used correctly, probably easier!
A question: is a special task in the sense that it seem
On Thu, 14 Aug 2003, peter reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Will I place these tasks in ant or ant-contrib ?
Ant, they sound very useful. is a wonderful way to plug
in user preferences.
Stefan
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EM
>-Message d'origine-
>De : peter reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Envoyé : jeudi 14 août 2003 11:21
>À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Objet : [new tasks] presetdef and macrodef
>
>
>Hi,
>I have written a couple of tasks to enable definition of new tasks
>in ant
On Thursday 14 August 2003 10:31, Conor MacNeill wrote:
> Cool.
>
> I think these should go in Ant :-)
Excellent.
>
> As you know I had thought about but I'm happy to
> see you've done it. I think there is a slight property scoping issue
> for the nested params. I had thought about a different syn
Cool.
I think these should go in Ant :-)
As you know I had thought about but I'm happy to
see you've done it. I think there is a slight property scoping issue
for the nested params. I had thought about a different syntax for
macro params (e.g. $[target]), perhaps hooked into a specific propert
Hi,
I have written a couple of tasks to enable definition of new tasks
in ant.
(formally known as extendtype)
this defines a new task or type based on a current ant task or type, with
attributes or elements preset.
example useage:
may now be used as a task in the same way
34 matches
Mail list logo
