From dev-return-51524-apmail-ant-dev-archive=ant.apache.org@ant.apache.org Mon Oct 06 21:38:59 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-ant-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 59194 invoked from network); 6 Oct 2003 21:38:59 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Oct 2003 21:38:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 33863 invoked by uid 500); 6 Oct 2003 21:38:44 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-ant-dev-archive@ant.apache.org Received: (qmail 33828 invoked by uid 500); 6 Oct 2003 21:38:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Ant Developers List" Reply-To: "Ant Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@ant.apache.org Received: (qmail 33811 invoked from network); 6 Oct 2003 21:38:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO olinexvs01.olin.edu) (4.21.173.2) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Oct 2003 21:38:43 -0000 Received: from olinexfe01.olin.edu ([10.1.15.93]) by olinexvs01.olin.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Mon, 6 Oct 2003 17:38:47 -0400 Received: from cognition.olin.edu ([4.36.33.205]) by olinexfe01.olin.edu (SAVSMTP 3.0.0.44) with SMTP id M2003100617384222904 for ; Mon, 06 Oct 2003 17:38:47 -0400 Message-ID: <3F81DFCF.7000407@cognition.olin.edu> Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 17:34:07 -0400 From: Gus Heck Reply-To: gus@cognition.olin.edu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20030917 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ant Developers List Subject: Re: failonerror; general solution References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Oct 2003 21:38:47.0928 (UTC) FILETIME=[39ABE780:01C38C52] X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Dominique Devienne wrote: >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Steve Loughran [mailto:steve_l@iseran.com] >>Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 11:23 AM >>To: Ant Developers List >>Subject: Re: failonerror; general solution >> >>Dale Anson wrote: >> >> >>>What's the difference in use case between this and the try/catch from >>>ant-contrib or antelope? I'd suggest grabbing the try/catch from either, >>>and making it a core task. Just judging from the e-mail that I get, the >>>try/catch task in antelope is one of the main reasons people download >>> >>> >>it. >> >>I am +1 to trycatch, because it gives you better failure modes than just >>'ignore'; like the option to rollback or warn. >> >> > >I'm +0 to trycatch, and +1 to enhancing myself. --DD > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org >For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org > > > I see that both have their benefits. trycatch is slightly nicer in that you can do the catch right there, or set a property and use it the way sequential would work... I think that that is true from looking at the examples posted. Sequential has the advantage of not needing to get the ant-contrib folks to give it to us (which I seem to remember was the sticking point b4) If try-catch can be pulled in quick I'd be +1 for that +0 for sequential, and the oposite if it is going to take weeks to get try catch in.... Nothing prevents us from adding try catch later for additional functionality. If it isnt' going in 1.6 then I am for waiting on try/catch cause we probably have another year before 1.7 comes out :) -Gus --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org