> -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Donald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, October 20, 2000 7:57 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Refactoring fork functionality into common (super) class > > > At 06:54 20/10/00 -0700, you wrote: > >I've been working on an ANTLR taskdef ( I should be in the position to > >submit it soon ). I had to implement forking in order to get some tree > >stuff to work correctly, I took all of the code from the Java task. So > >I took a quick look around and I'm thinking it may be possible > to refactor > >the fork behavior into a superclass ( which would extend Task, I like the > >name ForkingTask, but YMMV ) and have a bunch of the tasks which use > >forking extend that. > > > >I may have a bit of time I could spend on this, but I would rather not > >put in the time, before I heard what people thought of it. So... > >thoughts? > > I would be +1 on that ;) That is one of the things I want to address real > soon now - and your method works for current ant so I like ;) > > Cheers, > > Pete
I took a longer look at how other tasks are handling forking. JUnit and ANTLR ( because I looked at JUnit to figure out how to do ANTLR ) handle the forking themselves, the EJB tasks handle it by using the Java task ( they fork all the time ). This makes me think that the superclass I proposed really isn't needed. I can just change ANTLR to use a Java task, and setFork based on the attribute in ANTLR. Erik
