Except that "parallel" in the sense of execOn simply says that it's ok to provide the whole fileset to the command at once, rather than running the command for each file.
The same thing could be achieved if there were a way to get a string representation of a fileset (useful for debugging) then you could just call <exec>. I agree though, it would be interesting to have a "true" parallel attribute, and the right place to have such an interesting attribute is on a <foreach> task, not on every clone of existing tasks that operates on a fileset... -Peter > -----Original Message----- > From: Roger Vaughn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 6:50 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: executing task for each file in file set > > > --- Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > <execon> is a different beast. As long as you say parallel="false", > > we are talking about iteration, but this nice little parallel > > attribute makes all the difference - you can transform a > whole set of > > files at once, without any iteration. <execon> is a little > more than > > just <foreach> and <exec> nested into a single task. > > > > This is not taking away anything from the argument that > iteration can > > be used to describe what you want to do. > > Ah, a compelling argument. Thank you. But, as you point out > yourself, this > doesn't take away the need for foreach itself. Furthermore, > if you wanted to > provide *real* power, you could put the "parallel" option on > the foreach task! > I'll have to concede that the parallel option might be a > little dangerous for > general consumption, though. :-) > > roger > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 > a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ >
