For what its worth I agree with you +100% ;). Look at my stuff in the thread about adding the generic idea of a AntSet. Then the <Ant> task would already support this even if the <Ant> task developer hasn't thought about it. Its also clearly (from my perspective at least) not a loop or conditional construct.
d On Thu, 8 Mar 2001 08:15:12 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Both of those seem like hacks. On the one hand, you're married to some >external technology which may or may not have an analogy on the next >platform you build on, and you may have to port your batch file to this >new platform even in the best of cases. On the other hand, you're >using a catch-all that's meant for running something exceptional or >unusual. This, I believe, is neither. > >John > >-----Original Message----- >From: d.rees.l [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2001 7:28 PM >To: ant-user >Subject: Re: batching of ant task > > >Yeah, but I thought it was different enough to sneak in ;). Actually, >I have some extended thoughts on this that I will post on dev. > >Casey, looks like you will have to jump through a few hoops. The >easiest way is (obviously) so do it from a batch file. > >The cleaner way would be to use the scripting task. That lets you do >anything you want. > >d > >On 07 Mar 2001 10:56:45 +0100, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > >>David Rees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> How about a batch property task instead? Better syntax is certainly >>> possible, >> >>you mean <foreach>? ;-) >> >>Right now I'd say, this would be too complex - but feel free to lobby >>for a feature like this on ant-dev - especially since we'll start >>collecting feature requests and set the direction for Ant2. >> >>Stefan > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
