ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Emmanuel Feller" <Emmanuel.Fel...@free.fr>
Subject Re: failonerror; general solution
Date Thu, 09 Oct 2003 12:28:32 GMT
I am not saying that everyone should redesign wheel because
ant is not script ...
I was like you tired of the scripting tabu, but i review my
opinion when i had to do my first very complex build file.
The scripting way was not the description way and i found a
wall when i developped the scripting way, because i miss
description details in my process.

I am saying that :
You should not take a solution because it exists but because
you need really it. I might that every project are
differents and that task are the basics element of
construction game.
Now your project drive the way you build, you should take
care on patterns but not apply a solution because marked as
THE solution.

My builds are less complex still I developpe my own task,
because i use all basic stuff in my context.

So you may developp a script with foreach, if, and every
task. It will be long and may be not efficicent.

Me I developp a task that verify if uptodate, compile, jar
and javadoc my basic element of project.
It is only a wrapper on ant core task ... no redeveloppement
of basic things but value added things.
And after i have a task that ask my scm for modules names
and location and call the previous task.
(I am migrating my task within macro).

This is one of my targets. My build file are quite short
(around 2000 lines with comments), and are simple to
maintain.

I took time to understand (around 1year) but now i think
that i am efficient on build process.
Newbies may not have abstraction point of view if we provide
the scripting features.
Only my opinion,
Emmanuel
----- Message d'origine ----- 
De : "Jose Alberto Fernandez" <jalberto@cellectivity.com>
À : "Ant Developers List" <dev@ant.apache.org>
Envoyé : jeudi 9 octobre 2003 14:03
Objet : RE: failonerror; general solution


So are you saying that instead of having access to generic
things in ANT that anyone can use, we should prefer having
every user defining it own little dialect with his own
little tasks
for minor things that everybody needs. (I.e., I do not think
anybody denies the need for doing things conditionally on
the build).

I find this very strange.

I have my own tasks too, but this are tasks for our inhouse
code generator
and such which are specific to our environment (so I am not
afraid to
define them), I also have my own <forall/> tasks which works
diferent
than the <foreach/> of antcontrib. But why you want every
user to
reinvent <if>, etc. It makes no sense to me. (At the end we
get
enhancement request after enhancement request, for ways of
doing things
that can be done using this simple tasks, efficiently.

I do not think the aim of ANT is to require people to write
java code
for every other thing they need in their build. The point of
ANT and
ANTLIB in particular is to provide reusable tasks that
anyone can use.
If you do not like a certain group of tasks, well do not use
them, but
that does not mean vetoeing anyone else to use them.

And as I have said several times now, I am not asking for
them
to be added to core, I an just asking them to be shippen as
a
useful antlib that people can use in their builds, if they
want.

Jose Alberto
PS: I am so tired of the "ANT should not be a scripting
language" tabu
when in reality it is, just like MAKE or any other
description language
that gets executed. ANT is not a procedural language, that I
agree, but it is a script.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Emmanuel Feller [mailto:Emmanuel.Feller@free.fr]
> Sent: 09 October 2003 12:26
> To: Ant Developers List
> Subject: Re: failonerror; general solution
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I not agree on all ...
>
> The <if/> is not a good thing, and especially in big
builds.
> My builds are quite comlex and I reduce complexity by
> developping my own tasks : this is the official way and
> (IMHO) should be promoted. I developped wrapper around
> conditionnal things but now I have access to macro by
> <macrodef/>, and I think i will refactor my build around
> this. So i think than the <if/> has no place in ANT any
more,
> if it could had one. The same things for <foreach/>.
>
> I think than Ant 1.6 is a quite revolution (cleaner ways,
> simpler ways), so i do not want it to be misunderstood.(In
My
> Humble Opinion)
>
> I use the try/catch, and it could be shipped but I do not
> want that it convince newbies than Ant is a scripting
> framework. It is a real danger.
>
> For the propertyCopy, i use it a lot, but i am searching a
> cleaner way to do it. On this i do not have an opinion.
>
> Emmanuel
> ----- Message d'origine ----- 
> De : "Jose Alberto Fernandez" <jalberto@cellectivity.com>
> À : "Ant Developers List" <dev@ant.apache.org>
> Envoyé : jeudi 9 octobre 2003 12:59
> Objet : RE: failonerror; general solution
>
>
> To tell you the truth I think that the 5(?) tasks of
> antcontrib are just a necesity if you try to write
> large ANT scripts that must be maintainable by more than
one person.
>
> The <if/> task helps reduce the amount of temporary
> variables ant
> special init-targets and intermediate targets whose only
> need is to
> check for a property being set or not.
>
> <trycatch/> speaks for itself.
>
> In my builds, at least, <foreach/> is a necesity, since
many
> of my
> modules
> must be build several times with different configuration
> parameters. And the number of configurations is
configurable.
>
> The other ones, <propertycopy> and others are just good.
>
> This is why I think we should ask for permission to ship
it
> as an
> antlib.
> It will serve as an example of the power of the framework.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Gus Heck [mailto:gus-antdev@cognition.olin.edu]
> > Sent: 08 October 2003 19:58
> > To: Ant Developers List
> > Subject: Re: failonerror; general solution
> >
> >
> >
> > >I'm not as eager to see the tasks in Ant proper as
> others,
> > that's why I
> > >haven't taken any initiative here (in Apache speak,
> that's the
> > >difference between my +0 and the +1s that have been
cast
> by others).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > Are we talking about all ant-contrib tasks or just
> try/catch?
> > I thought
> > just try/catch...
> >
> > -Gus
> >
> >
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
--
> ---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
-----------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
>
>

------------------------------------------------------------
---------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org


Mime
View raw message