--- Daniel Barclay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What if two lists list the same depended-on targets but in different > orders? > > (Target A depends on X and target A depends on Y. You can't list them > without choosing an order, so you happen to pick "X, Y". Target B > depends on target Y. Target B also depends on target X. You happen > to write "Y, X". > > For "ant A B", do you build X or Y first? There is no answer if you > must follow the order in which they're listed, because you can't > say "_the_ order in which they're listed," because they're listed in > more than one order.
Sure there is. Given 'ant A B', it'll run X,Y,A,Y,X,B; running 'ant B A' runs Y,X,B,X,Y,A. And if you add a target "Z" that depends on both A and B, listed as depends="A,B", running 'ant Z' will run X,Y,A,B,Z -- listed as depends="B,A", it'll run Y,X,B,A,Z. (This is almost identical to how 'make' would do it, except for the first case, where it would only run X,Y,A,B, since X and Y were already run -- 'make b a' runs Y,X,B,A.) > (I don't think you'd want to require all lists to list them in a > compatible order. That would require the user to figure out a complete > ordering that satisfies all partial ordering requirements. That's > something the tool should continue doing.) 1. I don't have a problem with requiring a build-file writer to know what order things should get built in -- if they don't know that, then they shouldn't be writing the build-file :) 2. If I specify a list of dependencies, I expect the order of that list to be followed -- even with wigged-out ones like your example :) I see that list as amounting to a little for-loop (ie: for dependency in X Y, run dependency). 3. I don't know of any build tool that would chuck the order of the list of dependencies. Diane ===== ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/
