From: "Bruce Atherton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Your second example says: fill the set with everything, and then take the > intersection of that set and the set of elements which match the filename > *.java.
Set of everything is "Universal Set". You cannot create a subset without a universal set. In Ant's context, <include> itself is a selector which selects a few files from the set of all files. > <grin> I carefully avoided <and> since there is such sensitivity on this > list to anything that smacks of the slippery slope of scripting, previously > added features notwithstanding. ;-) I don't think there will be much opposition because <condition> allows it. I think it just gives more expressive power... But then again, others may feel differently. > > > Also, > >I think it would be easier for people to > >grasp the name selector instead of cull, as selector, > > Whatever. I wrote that code in December, when I was told that the concept > was called cullers, so that's what I called it. > > If we're going to paint this bikeshed, though... Since conceptually it is > limiting what can go into a PatternSet or FileSet, don't you think a word > that suggests removal is better? "Exclusions" is too long, but that sort of > idea. "Cull" works well here since it is nice and short, but I hear what > you are saying about the term being rare. <excluder> may be better if you like removal concept better - <size-excluder>, <name-excluder>, <date-excluder>, etc. <cull> is perhaps the apt word, but as I said and you agreed, it isn't commonly being used. But if it is just going to be a documentation thing, I don't mind it being called a culler. Anyway, I should be able to select the files I want and cull the files I do not want. > ><exclude> works on the previously <include>d items > >only. There is no extra trip. > > Sure there is, in the same way as your first example: by (conceptually, if > not in code) creating a set of everything and then taking the intersection > of that set and the set of read only files and the set of files with size > greater than 5. Why is the set of everything in there? Only because you've > forced it on the user whether they want it or not. Conceptually, there is always a set of everything - no getting around it. For example, from what do you identify the set of those files whose size is greater than 4K? > > I still don't understand the need for selectorsets, but I'm willing to be > convinced. selectorsets is perhaps the wrong term I used. What I wishes were there was a means to say make referenceable the <agreecull> element that you suggested. I would like to see the <agreecull> or whatever it is going to be named as. This would provide the functionality that I would miss if I do not use the existing selectors :-o Cheers, Magesh -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
