At 10:45 6/12/00 +0100, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >James Duncan Davidson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On 12/6/00 1:20 AM, "Stefan Bodewig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Because this has been ruled out back in May/June on >>> ant-dev. Something along the lines of "I don't need it as I use >>> jikes and doing a clean build is faster than having an explicit >>> dependency tracker". >> >> That assumes that it can't be turned off. But if there is an >> attribute that allows it to be turned off for people who don't want >> it (or is effectively ignored if compilertype="jikes"), then it's >> not an issue, no? >> > >Wrong list for this discussion. > >Anyway, I tend to agree with you - and did back in May - but the >downside is that <depend> relies on a bunch of other classes and that >would make <javac> more complicated.
+1 It would be very very useful to integrate it for those poor souls who don't choose to use jikes ;) I would like to see Javac to become a facade for lower level compilers. ie - instead of having logic for jikes/javac modern/javac classic/microsoft/gnu/symantec compilers we should instead place the code for these in seperate places and effectively pass them a hashmap of properties post resolution in javac task. So once classpath/bootpath is resolved and any dependencies zapped we should pass the hashmap with something like directory = blah source = blee files = [ a.java, b.java ... ] verbose = false ... What do you think of that ? Cheers, Pete *-----------------------------------------------------* | "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, | | and proving that there is no need to do so - almost | | everyone gets busy on the proof." | | - John Kenneth Galbraith | *-----------------------------------------------------*
