On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Peter Donald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why don't we add the ability to evaluate perl scipts inside > attributes?
Do we prevent people from writing tasks that do that? Not that I was aware of it. > Immutable properties are good because they free ant developers and > ant users from worrying about sequencing concerns in project > processing and it is a much simpler model for build file > writers. I think you are mixing properties being made immutable by the core and properties being immutable by the choice of the tasks. Look at what I've changed with my commit - log messages and comments and I removed a @deprecated tag. I'm not against modifying our current tasks so that they keep properties immutable, I just want to make sure that task writers have the choice to do different in their own tasks. Build file writers won't have to worry about sequencing or anything else, as long as they don't use their own <change-property> task. > They don't have to worry about how different tasks handle > assignment. So much for making things consistent. The built-in tasks we have are as consitent when it comes to treating properties as they've been two hours ago. Stefan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
