> How about "self"?
"self" has my vote!
> I'm not sure whether the other committers will agree that adding
> references to the current target and the task itself. It is fine with
> me, but given that Pete vetoes adding a property with the name of the
> current target, it seems likely he wouldn't enjoy these changes
> either.
Code within <script> already has access to all references and properties, so
it could already get to its own task instance if it wanted. The purpose of
<script> is to allow "ad hoc" tasks to be created, so it seems that giving
cleaner access to the Task object would only help that purpose.
Pete already gave a resounding +100000 to making the Project object
accessible.
And yes to Jose's question about using self.project and self.owningTarget -
I had just left the getProject in there from past tests with my
modification.
Erik
