ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <>
Subject Re: Update to Sandbox/antlib
Date Thu, 14 Feb 2002 03:10:55 GMT
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002 20:14, Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
> > On Wed, 13 Feb 2002 03:07, Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
> > > Proxys need to be there also (optionally) so that we
> > > can do what TaskAdapter does AND more importantly, try
> > > to solve the type inconsistency issue between
> > > TaskContainers and Datatypes that now is solved by
> > > accident.
> >
> > Blech - dont like adapters at all. I guess we can chalk this up to ant1.x
> > legacy but it still feels ungainly to me :( I would prefer we just ignore
> > the DataTypes inconsistency and just try not to introduce anymore
> > inconsistencies.
> We still have TaskAdapter which converts beans into Tasks. So the concept
> is still there, and given the rules of ANT1 is there to stay :(

I dont see TaskAdapter in that light. I see TaskAdaptor as more an 
alternative strategy for defining tasks. Like that which has been discussed 
with regards to scripting recently and what was discussed ages ago with 
respect to templating etc. 

So adapters are part of definition concern not part of type system.

> > No I was more thinking that you could grab a FileSet object, add a new
> > pattern to it and this new pattern would appear in parent project. That
> > makes me feel icky. I guess this is already possible with inheriting
> > datatypes via ant/antcall - yuck. Hmm we haven't released that maybe we
> > should consider zapping support for it ? :)
> Oh, I have not muck around with the properties and references symbol
> tables, those could be next :) I am just talking about taskdef and typedef
> registries.

oh thats fine then ;)

One thing you may want to do is have a look at at is JDiff at

It allows you to look at the differences between two APIs. It is used by 
quite a few JSR groups to track evolution of an API. 

If you could run against your new API and against the old version I am sure 
that would give people a better sense of how things are changed.

You could even set up a JUnit test that verified no backwards incompatible 
changes were made :)



| Contrary to popular belief, UNIX is user-friendly. It   |
| just happens to be selective on who it makes friendship |
| with.                                                   |
|                       - Richard Cook                    |

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

View raw message