ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jose Alberto Fernandez" <jalbe...@cellectivity.com>
Subject RE: antlib
Date Fri, 25 Apr 2003 14:46:08 GMT
> From: Costin Manolache [mailto:cmanolache@yahoo.com]
> 
> 
> Fine - but do this in core, not in antlib.
> 

But this are changes to core. Granted they are comming as part of the bundle
but they are not in antlib.

What it is in antlib is a way to declare these roles and I am 100% with you
that we should be able to declare them with a task of their owm that can be
used in the buildfile directly. Fine with me.

> Antlib needs to load whatever ant supports. Not to define new things. 
> 
> I don't have any problem with polymorphism ( or roles ). 
> Nobody said they
> shouldn't be added. My only comment is that the implementation of
> polymorphism shouldn't be tied with antlib, and I would 
> preffer a solution
> that would simplify the core - i.e. interfaces or something 
> like that, that 
> would allow us to treat all components as components at the low level.
> 

Well this is exactly what I am trying to achieve, and I think the it does.
Roles ARE interfaces not strings. The names of the roles are just
syntactic sugar to simplify declarations.

> An unified way to treat all the sub-types should be defined 
> and implemented 
> as part of the core. 
> 

100% with you.

> We can wait with antlib ( the part that loads 
> whatever-things-ant-supports)
> until polymorphism is defined, but I would preffer having 
> antlib included
> in ant sooner.
> 

Sounds good.

Jose Alberto

Mime
View raw message