ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Magesh Umasankar" <>
Subject Re: cullers
Date Tue, 26 Feb 2002 15:48:29 GMT
From: "Bruce Atherton" <>

> Your second example says: fill the set with everything, and then take the
> intersection of that set and the set of elements which match the filename
> *.java.

Set of everything is "Universal Set".
You cannot create a subset without a
universal set.  In Ant's context,
<include> itself is a selector which
selects a few files from the set
of all files.

> <grin> I carefully avoided <and> since there is such sensitivity on this
> list to anything that smacks of the slippery slope of scripting,
> added features notwithstanding.

;-) I don't think there will be much
opposition because <condition> allows
it.  I think it just gives more
expressive power...  But then again,
others may feel differently.

> >   Also,
> >I think it would be easier for people to
> >grasp the name selector instead of cull, as selector,
> Whatever. I wrote that code in December, when I was told that the concept
> was called cullers, so that's what I called it.
> If we're going to paint this bikeshed, though... Since conceptually it is
> limiting what can go into a PatternSet or FileSet, don't you think a word
> that suggests removal is better? "Exclusions" is too long, but that sort
> idea. "Cull" works well here since it is nice and short, but I hear what
> you are saying about the term being rare.

<excluder> may be better if you like removal
concept better - <size-excluder>, <name-excluder>,
<date-excluder>, etc.  <cull> is perhaps the apt
word, but as I said and you agreed, it isn't
commonly being used.  But if it is just going
to be a documentation thing, I don't mind it
being called a culler.  Anyway, I should
be able to select the files I want and
cull the files I do not want.

> ><exclude> works on the previously <include>d items
> >only.  There is no extra trip.
> Sure there is, in the same way as your first example: by (conceptually, if
> not in code) creating a set of everything and then taking the intersection
> of that set and the set of read only files and the set of files with size
> greater than 5. Why is the set of everything in there? Only because you've
> forced it on the user whether they want it or not.

Conceptually, there is always a set of
everything - no getting around it.  For
example, from what do you identify
the set of those files whose size is
greater than 4K?

> I still don't understand the need for selectorsets, but I'm willing to be
> convinced.

selectorsets is perhaps the wrong term I used.
What I wishes were there was a means to say
make referenceable the <agreecull> element
that you suggested.

I would like to see the <agreecull> or
whatever it is going to be named as.  This
would provide the functionality that I
would miss if I do not use the existing
selectors :-o


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

View raw message