Sorry, too many ITs... <antcall> can break a build by executing some targets twice.
-----Original Message----- From: Alex Solofnenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 10:45 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Order of Depends No, I meant an UNIX pipe. The syntax is not important '&' sign is also good. Its implementation can be tricky in a multithreaded environment, but I think it is better than <antcall/> - it will break the normal target execution and some targets can be executed twice. -----Original Message----- From: Nico Seessle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 2:39 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Order of Depends > Maybe another syntax can be added to ant: <target name="x" depends="a|b|c"/>? > And that does mean what? X depends on a or b or c? Should b be executed if a was executed successful? Maybe we should also add something like - <target name="x" depends="a && (b|c)"/> (execute a, if that is successful execute b and if b fails execute c) - <target name="x" depends="!a || (b && c)"/> (execute a. If a fails execute b and c) - <target name="x" depends="a[1...3]"/> (x depends on targets a1, a2 and a3) :-) Nico --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
