ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <>
Subject Re: Threaded Ant?
Date Thu, 02 Mar 2000 10:43:07 GMT
Michael Smith wrote:
> William Uther wrote:
> > Hmm.  I must admit to being confused as to why the ordering constraint is
> > there.  If you have a strict ordering constraint then you could enforce it
> > with a dependancy.  No target would be executed before the targets it
> > depends upon.  I would prefer to default to parallel.
> I agree that if you have an ordering constraint you would use an explicit
> dependency.  But I am still left wondering: Why do you want/need to run
> things in parallel right now?  What do you gain?
> Better usage of a multi-processor system?  In that case, why not run Ant in
> two different shells with two different build files (or one build file and
> two different targets).  That'll also make your life easier when a build
> fails -- you won't have to figure out which log messages went with which
> task.  It also leaves Ant "simple" and easy to use.
> Making Ant multithreaded seems like it's increasing the complexity too much
> too fast.  At this point,  I see no compelling reason to add in something
> like this. How about we solve one problem at a time...  Seems like there are
> three or four different threads going on right now, and they all overlap to
> some degree.


Please, since Ant is a tool and all of us have other things to
concentrate on, let's focus on getting useful things done before
spitting new proposals each and every day.

The bandwidth taken by the list has grown a lot... but I wonder about
the signal/noise ratio.

Stefano Mazzocchi      One must still have chaos in oneself to be
                          able to give birth to a dancing star.
<>                             Friedrich Nietzsche
 Come to the first official Apache Software Foundation Conference!  
------------------------- http://ApacheCon.Com ---------------------

View raw message