On Wed, 27 Feb 2002, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What is the logic of the FileSet not handling mappers?
FileSets are sets of (existing) files. Mappers transform one set of filenames into a different set of filenames. > A PatternSet can represent a list of items (say, package names). No, a PatternSet represents a a set of file name patterns, this is not realted to package names at all. > A FileSet can not be generated from this unless either the > PatternSet or FileSet handle mappers. Why not? > Since PatternSet does not allow nested PatternSets, you can not use > one PatternSet (package names) for the source of two FileSets (.java > and .class) unless the FileSet handles mappers. <patternset> <include name="org/apache/tools/ant/*" /> </patternset> matches .class and .java files in the package org.apache.tools.ant. <patternset> <include name="org/apache/tools/ant/*.java" /> <include name="org/apache/tools/ant/*.class" /> </patternset> makes sure you don't match anything that is not a .java or .class file. > By providing mapper capability to PatternSet and FileSet, all tasks > immediately have the capability of taking this sort of input. I'm not sure I understand which sort of input you are talking about. > and PatternSets and FileSets are not very interchangeable. Of course they aren't - they are completely different concepts. Stefan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
