> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Roger Vaughn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > --- 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
> >
> > Ah, a compelling argument.
>
> Thanks - I'm supposed to defend the tasks I've written ;-)
>
> > But, as you point out yourself, this doesn't take away the need for
> > foreach itself.
>
> In certain circumstances - and I don't pretend that we can anticipate
> everything. To me foreach (or iterate or whatever) are probably most
> useful for sets that are not sets of files, but some new user defined
> data types.
To a large extent, I agree with you, I certainly don't believe that
a foreach task should be limited to filesets, and a lot of the
ideas I have for using a foreach that is a part of the core, or at
least a part of the "official" optional tasks (as opposed to the
suggestion that it come from some repository of tasks a'la CPAN) because
I firmly believe that it is a "core" descriptive word for build problems.
My point about execOn is that it exists really only because of two
limitations in ant:
1. No foreach :-)
2. No way to get a string representation of a fileset (i.e. list
of files)
#1 covers the "typical" use of execOn, #2 handles the "parallel" use of
execOn.
>
> > Furthermore, if you wanted to provide *real* power, you could put
> > the "parallel" option on the foreach task!
>
> Ouch!
Yeah, threads, etc. I don't think it is necessary, though it does have
cool potential...
-Peter
>
> Stefan
>
