ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Vernum <Tim.Ver...@macquarie.com.au>
Subject RE: What is a 'declarative' language [ was Re: [VOTE] vote on ge neral direction ...]
Date Wed, 28 Mar 2001 01:44:55 GMT
From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]

> > Having optional dependencies is one thing that could be added.
> 
> Adding some larger amount of complexity though. I've tried to find
> some use cases for this - my fantasy seems too limited, sorry.

Me too.
I'm sure if I was pushed I could come up with some, but they're entirely contrived.

> > You could change if/unless to be treated more like dependencies,
> > rather than conditions.
> 
> Sounds interesting. How would you see something like this?

I have no idea about the implementation specifics, but it occured to
me that "if" is just a depenency, and unless is just a negated
dependency.

They have additional semantics though
   * ant is given no rules to make them, so it doesn't
   * in light of the above, the target that depends on them is simply
     skipped if the condition isn't true.

But there's no definite reason that the such rules need only apply to
property dependencies.
If in Ant2, it is possible to have a failed task not stop the build,
then you could apply additional relationship rules between tasks.

All that was really running through me head when I wrote that was
 "if/unless is just another type of precondition on a task, it
  might be possible to unify them with dependencies"


> > That's part of what I'm getting at here.
> > Who cares if lisp is procedural or not? 
> 
> We are in the same boat, Tim. I don't want to fight about names for
> things or about notations, it's the functionality that matters.

I know, but I can't pass up an opportunity to rant :)

Mime
View raw message