ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jose Alberto Fernandez" <>
Subject RE: antlib
Date Fri, 25 Apr 2003 14:46:08 GMT
> From: Costin Manolache []
> Fine - but do this in core, not in antlib.

But this are changes to core. Granted they are comming as part of the bundle
but they are not in antlib.

What it is in antlib is a way to declare these roles and I am 100% with you
that we should be able to declare them with a task of their owm that can be
used in the buildfile directly. Fine with me.

> Antlib needs to load whatever ant supports. Not to define new things. 
> I don't have any problem with polymorphism ( or roles ). 
> Nobody said they
> shouldn't be added. My only comment is that the implementation of
> polymorphism shouldn't be tied with antlib, and I would 
> preffer a solution
> that would simplify the core - i.e. interfaces or something 
> like that, that 
> would allow us to treat all components as components at the low level.

Well this is exactly what I am trying to achieve, and I think the it does.
Roles ARE interfaces not strings. The names of the roles are just
syntactic sugar to simplify declarations.

> An unified way to treat all the sub-types should be defined 
> and implemented 
> as part of the core. 

100% with you.

> We can wait with antlib ( the part that loads 
> whatever-things-ant-supports)
> until polymorphism is defined, but I would preffer having 
> antlib included
> in ant sooner.

Sounds good.

Jose Alberto

View raw message