On Wed, 7 Jan 2004, Jose Alberto Fernandez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> How does it work in 1.6? Does "ant A B" will still execute target
> "B" twice?
I hope so.
But I'm not sure whether it still reuses the same task instances.
Stefan
---
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Historically the tasks are doing so for a different reason. In Ant
> < 1.6 task instances could get reused. Say you have target A
> depending on B and somebody runs "ant A B", then B will get
> executed twice and reuse the instances create
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Antoine Lévy-Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Because of these type of issues, a number of tasks which in the
> execute method are changing instance variables are resetting these
> instance variables at the end of the execute method.
Historically the tasks are doing so f
The reason the refernces to created tasks is an accidental consequence
of the implementation of UnknownElement and RuntimeConfigurable.
It is difficult to remove the reference without telling UnknownElement
in Target#execute and Seqential#execute that the reference can be
removed.
Peter
Jose Albert
I think the two ways of reusing tasks that you point below
are fair usage, however that do not answer my question about
.
For the issue of reusability itself, let me point how I think it
should work on the cases you mentioned:
(1) If one IDs a task, we are really setting the ID on the
UnknownObj
> From: Antoine Lévy-Lambert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
>
> >Given the realization of Peter, maybe we need to embark on
> >a code review of the tasks, at least the most important
> >to make sure we do not keep hold or objects unnecessarily.
> >
> >If you look at
Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
Given the realization of Peter, maybe we need to embark on
a code review of the tasks, at least the most important
to make sure we do not keep hold or objects unnecessarily.
If you look at the memory utitization numbers I submitted
all of them are like much larger, eve
