Mike Dougherty wrote: > > On Sun, 2001-12-09 at 19:13, Bobby Nations wrote: > > It works, I like it! I by no means have the final word, but may I > suggest a few changes? >
By all means. That's the great thing about working with others ... instant growth :-) After all, no one owns the code, and so it's always available for refactoring and improving. > 15c15 > < <property name="build.dir" value="btree" /> > --- > > <property name="build.dir" value="classes" /> > > Functionally it does the same thing. I prefer to use classes, it's more > of name for what is going in the directory. Also, a few IDEs that > compile into separate directories (i.e. JBuilder) use "src" and > "classes" so this name will make it easier for those lazy developers > that use an IDE. (Ooooh, I feel flame coming on...) > Works for me, and there's already a classes directory in CVS. I believe it was used to house the final jar file (at least that's where it showed up when I did a make), but it does make more sense to instead use it to house the intermediate class files instead. Not being much of an IDE guy, I didn't know about their default ways of doing things. Thanks for the info. > 37c37 > < <target name="compile" depends="javadoc"> > --- > > <target name="compile" depends="init,createDir"> > > Compiling doesn't necessarily depend on Javadoc's being generated, but > it does depend on the other two. It also can be time consuming to > recreate the Javadocs every time you compile. > No problem, I just got tired of typing 'ant javadoc' all of the time. Good comments, and thanks for the help. Bobby > /mike > > -- > ****************************************** > Mike Dougherty -- Java Software Engineer > ****************************************** > Hope is a waking dream. > -- Aristotle
