Bill Petheram wrote:
> Well I didn't realise that you weren't going to use regular expressions. If > you had said that initially then we could have saved a lot of e-mails. > > 'Regular Expressions are too difficult for ordinary users'. It seems to me > that you aren't expecting many Unix people to use ant. Now, now. Play nice. Suppose somebody where to propose changing the "ls" command so that from now on you would need to type ls .*\.class instead of ls *.class as you do today. Would you think most Unix users would think of the change? > 'the '**' feature it is exaclty what most users find natural.' Most ordinary > non Unix users you mean. I know of no system, Unix or otherwise, that supports "**", so that's bad. The question is what is the most minimal extension to what essentially is the syntax supported by the Unix ls command (which incidentally is remarkably similar to syntax supported by the DOS dir command) to meet the basic needs of ant. Arnout has proposed "**". Constructive suggestions for alternatives are welcome. - Sam Ruby
