On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Wolfgang Häfelinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Which one would you prefer? Or should we invent a new one?
>
> Use an existing one of course. There could also be more than one,
> just supported by a "language" attribute.
This is the approach the NAnt folks have chosen, you
Subject: Re: using multiple properties in the 'if' and 'unless'
conditions
It's believed that you can easily combine the various conditions in
one , that sets a single property based on as complex a
logic as 's nested / allows, so it's not
necessary.
When you remem
Riedel Thomas (KSFD 121) wrote:
Yes I agree the kind of our Ant-usage might be a bit beyond horizon. We
are doing continious integration for a 5 Mio LOC project, generic
automated junit testing, automatic deploying into a production like
server pool, online testing, web-testing, automated metrics
nd change it's
evaluation on demand:
fall back to whatever was there before
using "test"
Btw, we need to have a quota character. For example
Wolfgang.
Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26-06-2006 13:17
Please respond to
"Ant Developers List"
Wolfgang Häfelinger wrote:
Which one would you prefer? Or should we invent a new one?
Use an existing one of course. There could also be more than one,
just supported by a "language" attribute.
We do have the "clumsy" XML expression language that we built into the
condition task and it follo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
Has the possibility of adding multiple conditions to the target 'if' and
'unless' attributes ever been considered? Are there any reasons why this
change would be a bad idea?
I have found Groovy (and to a lesser degree other scripting
languages) to be very useful
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
Has the possibility of adding multiple conditions to the target 'if' and
'unless' attributes ever been considered? Are there any reasons why this
change would be a bad idea?
I have found Groovy (and to a lesser degree other scripting
languages) to be very useful
, you also need a lot of imagniation to understand
what you can do with Ant, right?
The only problem with "&" is that it is an "XML" character as
well.
Wolfgang.
Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25-06-2006 11:42
Please respond to
"Ant Developers
On Fri, 23 Jun 2006, Wolfgang Häfelinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What would so bad introducing an "expression language"?
Which one would you prefer? Or should we invent a new one?
We do have the "clumsy" XML expression language that we built into the
condition task and it follows the rest
y dynamic. We are in copious use of ,
and all the other nice contrib tasks that make ant more a
script language than an descriptive build tool.
The other possiblity for a bit more dynamic flow of control would be a
dynamic condition, I guess. In the sense that the evaluation of the
condition
done once when the task is executed but every
time somebody references that condition. But thats just a guess.
-Original Message-
From: Steve Loughran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 1:08 PM
To: Ant Developers List
Subject: Re: using multiple properties in the 'if
Riedel Thomas (KSFD 121) wrote:
We have written a large library of own very sophisticated ant tasks for
all the high level stuff. What I am thinking is that especially for the
work-flow control it would be great to steer the flow between different
targets via complex if-statements. I see the poin
descriptive, but a (somehow implemented) flow control would
make life easier (for the integration team ;))
-Original Message-
From: Kev Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 11:39 AM
To: Ant Developers List
Subject: Re: using multiple properties in the 'if
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jun 2006, Paul Mackay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Has the possibility of adding multiple conditions to the target 'if'
and 'unless' attributes ever been considered?
Yes, but it hasn't come up often after Ant 1.4 ;-)
Are there any reasons why this change woul
>Don't macrodef/scriptdef and friends help out here? I mean
>it's possible to embed an entire scripting language (BeanShell
>etc) inside an Ant build file, do these not provide enough
>flexibility for what you need?
Would be very difficult I think.
I think they prefer a
or something like th
On 23 Jun 2006, at 16:24, Riedel Thomas ((KSFD 121)) wrote:
r building, deploying and testing real large projects (>5 Mio LOC).
So our scripts became more and more complex workflow scripts
instead of simple Ant-scripts.
I do strongly believe that the simple change of more complex
(expressi
testing, would simplify Ant scripting considerably.
Wolfgang.
Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23-06-2006 05:54
Please respond to
"Ant Developers List"
To
dev@ant.apache.org
cc
Subject
Re: using multiple properties in the 'if' and 'unless' conditions
ng considerably.
Wolfgang.
Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23-06-2006 05:54
Please respond to
"Ant Developers List"
To
dev@ant.apache.org
cc
Subject
Re: using multiple properties in the 'if' and 'unless' conditions
On Thu, 22 Jun 2006, Paul Mackay &
On Thu, 22 Jun 2006, Paul Mackay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Has the possibility of adding multiple conditions to the target 'if'
> and 'unless' attributes ever been considered?
Yes, but it hasn't come up often after Ant 1.4 ;-)
> Are there any reasons why this change would be a bad idea?
One
It's believed that you can easily combine the various conditions in
one , that sets a single property based on as complex a
logic as 's nested / allows, so it's not
necessary.
When you remember that targets listed in 'depends' are executed before
'if' / 'unless' are evaluated, you can easily exec
Hello,
Has the possibility of adding multiple conditions to the target 'if' and
'unless' attributes ever been considered? Are there any reasons why this
change would be a bad idea?
cheers
paul
21 matches
Mail list logo
