From: Conor MacNeill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> From: "Stefan Bodewig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > * Make all datatypes interfaces to allow them to be
> customized in many
> > ways.
>
> -0, Not sure what the motivation for this.
I requested this, so let me explain.
Currently, a FileSet is a class.
To retreive the set of file that a FileSet "holds" you ask it for
a DirectoryScanner, which is also a class.
I consider DirectoryScanner to be primarily an implementation details
for filesets (ie, Its purpose is to provide a programmatic interface
to the contents of the fileset.)
DirectoryScanner exposes a lot of implementation details.
eg:
public void setIncludes(String[] includes)
public void setExcludes(String[] excludes)
I would consider that a FileSet is just a set of files.
That fact that a FileSet is currently defined as a set of
include/exclude patterns should be irrelevant to the task
writers.
As far as any task is concerned, supporting a nested FileSet
means you support a list of files.
Any task that supports filesets should support a set of files
that is not defined in terms of include/exclude patterns.
There have been times when I've wanted to generate a set of
files in some other way than through include/exclude patterns.
I would like to have been able to do something like:
public class MyStupidFileset implements FileSet
{
public File getNextFile()
{
...
}
public boolean isDone()
{
...
}
}
[ alternatively, this could be MyStupidDirectoryScanner ...,
I don't care either way ]
But as it stands now, all tasks expect a FileSet to return a
DirectoryScanner, and a DirectoryScanner is interfaced thus:
public String[] getIncludedFiles() {
public String[] getNotIncludedFiles() {
public String[] getExcludedFiles() {
public String[] getIncludedDirectories() {
public String[] getNotIncludedDirectories() {
public String[] getExcludedDirectories() {
If I want to generate files in some other means, then the above
interface is not at all suited.
Ultimately, my belief is that core datatypes (and associated
utility classes like DirectoryScanner) should have an interface
that describes their purpuse/function rather than their
implementation.
I also think that once that interface is defined, then it
should be provided as a java interface, to make it explicit
what the contract with task writers is.
I think I've waffled on enough there.
I hope that makes some sense.
