ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From peter reilly <>
Subject Re: jcoverage - what's the best practice for naming optional tasks?
Date Thu, 29 May 2003 07:50:37 GMT
I think you should prefix them like the jprobe tasks.
My reasoning is that they are separate tasks,
and so should not be wrapped in an outer element.
Namespaces will probally be introduced in ant 1.6 and
this will address name clashing and name context issues,
however your tasks are usefull now and it will be a long
time before the bulk of ant users upgrade to 1.6.

Perhaps you could use the prefix jc.
-  jcinstrument, jcmerge etc.


On Wednesday 28 May 2003 19:18, Malcolm Sparks wrote:
> Hi,
> With the help of a fellow Java hacker (Peter Morgan), I've put together
> a new Java code-coverage tool. It's based on Apache BCEL (bytecode
> engineering library). We chosen the rather boring and obvious title of
> jcoverage, and licensed it under GPL- you can download version 1.0 from
> - we've just ftp'd it up earlier today.
> We've designed jcoverage to be exclusively driven by Ant and have four
> new Ant tasks: instrument, merge, report and check. Obviously these
> taskdef names by themselves don't provide any meaningful context- ie.
> that they should be used in conjunction with jcoverage rather than some
> other utility.
> What's the best thing to do?
> A) Should I wrap them in some outer element, say, <jcoverage>
> B) Should I prefix them, like the junit tasks?
> C) Any other suggestions, namespaces? etc..
> I want to do "the right thing", so I'd really appreciate any help on
> this, thanks in advance!
> Malcolm

View raw message