ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <dona...@mad.scientist.com>
Subject RE: Incremental Compilation and ant
Date Fri, 21 Jul 2000 04:36:59 GMT
At 02:33  21/7/00 +1000, you wrote:
>> I used to be of opinion that we should do this but I can't see any reason
>> to at all anymore. Classfile analysis is probably the best of a bunch of
>> bad choices. The reason is that the building of dependancies will end up
>> being *slower* than deleting the whole tree and recompiling using
>> jikes !!!
>>
>
>Peter, Well I know you like Jikes :-) Not everyone, however, chooses to use
>Jikes. I would like to see whether everyone not using Jikes is content to
>delete their whole tree to guarantee that their compilations are valid.

True but it seems like adding an ugly hack to Ant to workaround faults in
shoddy compilers. *sigh* :P

>Personally I have never really liked having to add code, which does nothing,
>merely to force the compiler to behave in certain ways. Of course, it is
>necessary to do sometimes, but it is error prone. People forget to add these
>bits of code. All IMHO, of course.

Yup. Except for dependancy hacks when referencing other final static
variables (which are necessary when you just do classfile analysis anyway)
this can all be auto-generated and the user doesn't have to wrorry about
anything. It was how early iterations of many builder style programs did it
(namely early JBuilder and early TogetherJ). They may even still do it but
I don't use proggies to know :P
Cheers,

Pete

*------------------------------------------------------*
| "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want |
| to test a man's character, give him power."          |
|       -Abraham Lincoln                               |
*------------------------------------------------------*

Mime
View raw message