Hi again! Peter Donald: > At 07:43 21/2/01 +0100, Christoph Wilhelms wrote: > >Am I missing something? I always thought the depending > targets will be > >executed in the order they have been entered like: > > they will be in the current implementation (and all the > proposals) but this > is not necessarily so by design. Especially when start allowing > multi-threading. Depends are meant to list all dependencies and thus > logically are unordered data type ;)
Agreed, but am I right when I say, that, even in future, the target threads will be STARTED in the order specified in the depend- parameter. This does NOT imply that the first target IS FINISHED before the second starts. I think it makes sense to be able to specify this, and I really propose to include this in the AntSpec! Any suggestions? Tim's workaround will always work, but it's really just a "workaround" because sometimes I do not want dependency-chains! Look at this one: Targets: cleanclassesdir compile buildall I do not want <compile> to depend on <cleanclassesdir> but when I execute <buildall> then first <cleanclassesdir> and then <compile> shlould be executed! In that case multithreading wouldn't make sense, too ;-). REMEBER: you can execute single targets, wich aren't the default target! In GUI-context like Antidote or the VAJIntegration this is the normal use case! Greetings, Chris
