Stefan Bodewig wrote: > Glenn McAllister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Just in case anyone is wondering, I had to create my include strings > > as > > > > org/blah/blah/** > > > > and test for .java files in each included directory, because doing > > > > org/blah/blah/**/*.java > > > > returns 0 included directories. > > Right, but you could get to your directory by calling File.getParent() > for the included files. Not sure, but this might be more efficient > than scanning the filesystem twice.
Fair enough. If I end up touching this again, I'll probably do it your way. However, it is pretty fast now, so maybe not. :-) > Hmm, I don't know why Arnout decided to name the things like he did, > but the logic is that an object is labeled included if it matches one > of the include patterns and no exclude pattern. Obviously a directory > doesn't match a **/*.java pattern, so it is not included by this > definition. I guess it just seems counterintuitive to me that if the file is included, the directory isn't necessarily included and I have to do tricks to get that extra information. Glenn McAllister
