On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Really we want everyone who used setProperty() in a task without > knowing of its side effect to move to setNewProperty(). So keeping a > warning in there would seem to work. If somebody really, really > wants to set a property with overwriting and no warning, then they > can use the #3 method, the one that isnt written yet, > setPropertyMutably(name,value) which will also unset a property if > the value is null.
This works well for me. Put in a warning that says, either use setNewProperty (we recommend that) or setPropertyMutable, whatever is closer to your original intent. All I want is to make sure that we don't remove the ability to change property values from the public API (and deprecating the only way to do so, says we are going to remove it). > http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/j-antbuild/?n-j-1261 > > In this article the author (a) doesnt know when init() is called > versus properties assigned Looks as if he's using the Ant 1.1 model for this. Stefan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
