ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Adam Murdoch" <>
Subject RE: TaskAdapter and execute()
Date Sat, 02 Mar 2002 04:27:24 GMT

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Donald []
> Sent: Saturday, 2 March 2002 12:54 PM
> To: Ant Developers List
> Subject: Re: TaskAdapter and execute()
> On Fri, 1 Mar 2002 23:54, Peter Donald wrote:
> > On Fri, 1 Mar 2002 23:21, Adam Murdoch wrote:
> > > The other bit would be to nick the XDocs stuff and get task/type
> > > documentation going.
> I went to do this and came across issues regarding set/add 
> confusion. I was 
> thinking that it may be to go back to the idea that set is just for 
> attributes and add is for nested elements. If you need to have both an 
> attribute and element with same name/type then the task developer 
> can simply 
> write something like
> void setClassPath( Path p )
> {
>   addClassPath( p );
> }
> If you are kool with that I will try to get Eriks stuff working 
> on myrmidon :)

What were the issues exactly?  I'd hate to see documentation generation be the sole reason
we switch back.  I think the behaviour we have right now is already proving itself to be really
powerful.  Sure, it makes generating docs harder, but it also makes writing tasks easier.
 Given that there's going to be one documentation generator, and thousands of tasks, well,
I think we want to stick with what we currently have.

For starters, let's not change the configuration behaviour, 'cause there's plenty of other
issues to sort out, besides figuring out whether something can be an attribute or nested element
or both.  If all we do is spit out the class description, and the description and type of
each property of the class (without distinguishing between attributes and nested elements),
then we're doing ok.


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

View raw message