ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <>
Subject Re: Getting 1.6 out the door
Date Tue, 02 Sep 2003 15:54:37 GMT

Gus Heck wrote, On 02/09/2003 17.26:
>  From Nicola Ken Barozzi:
>  >Imports should be reusable bits of builds. But instead they carry the 
> baggage
>  >of targets. With macrodef I can finally *create tasks using Ant*.
> And so Ant becomes an xml based programming language? Writing tasks in 
> java seems preferable to me. 

Ant is an "Ant" programming language. Writing "tasks" in Ant is much 
much simpler if they are an aggregation and specialization of existing 
Ant tasks, way simpler.

> I am not opposed to macrodef, but I want 
> clear syntax that doesn't make atributes look like properties, and if we 
> do have macrotemplates (which I still have some reservations about) I 
> think they should have a backwards compatable syntax that is also 
> clearly different from both properties and atributes. A clear syntax is 
> my biggest gripe here.

Any syntax is ok for me, I just tend to think that the proposed one is 
clear enough.

Nicola Ken Barozzi         
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message