ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Erik Hatcher <jakarta-...@ehatchersolutions.com>
Subject Re: antlib
Date Thu, 24 Apr 2003 17:01:11 GMT
On Thursday, April 24, 2003, at 12:39  PM, Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
> The language was trying to make writing antlibs easier you really only
> have one basic declaration which defines the elements available to you:
>
> 	<role name="X" classname="x.y.Z" adaptor="p.q.R"/>
>
> every declaration like this, implicitly makes available a new element 
> tag:
>
> 	<X name="Xname" classname="Xa.Xb.XC"/>

We don't really need to get hung up on the syntax of a descriptor at 
this stage.  Let's get something working in HEAD and work with it.  
XDoclet can be used to generate these descriptors anyway, and it likely 
be considered the best practice way to do it anyway.

> That's it. The DTD is dynamic just like the DTD of ANT is dynamic.

This is where I differ.  I like what I've heard so far, but I really 
don't like the total looseness of Ant build files, and I don't think we 
should propagate that same scheme.  I understand how it evolved and 
that ease of use was one of the primary factors for Ant's looseness, 
not to mention that it was around before namespaces were really 
solidified.

We don't need these descriptors to have dynamic element names, do we?

Again, lets not get hung up on the descriptor syntax.  Working 
implementation first - then we can debate the details.  We can make it 
the defining goal for an Ant 1.6 release when all the fiddly details 
have been ironed out!  :)

	Erik


Mime
View raw message