--- Michael J McGonagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The problem turned out that I was using 'unless="${file3.isBuilt}"' when
> it should have been 'unless="file3.isBuilt"'.
>
> Is it just a matter of the difference between testing for the
> 'exsistance of' and getting the 'value of'?
Nope -- 'if' and 'unless' don't test the value of a property, only whether
it's set/not-set.
> If this is the case, I can see why things were happening the way they
> were with my original code. Both times it was getting a 'true' when it
> tested for the property. On the one hand, it was true because the
> variable was not set, and in the second, it is true because its VALUE
> was true, and I was asking for its value and not its exsistance.
Nope -- you were saying "unless a property named '${file3.isBuilt}' is
set, run this target". And since a property with that (literal) name
wasn't set, your target ran. To see this try:
<!-- <property name="${foo}" value="true"/> -->
<target name="doUnless" unless="${foo}">
<echo message="Property $${foo} is not set."/>
</target>
<target name="doIf" if="${foo}">
<echo message="Property $${foo} is set."/>
</target>
$ ant doUnless doIf
doUnless:
[echo] Property ${foo} is not set.
Now uncomment the <property/> and run it again. Of course, you'd never
actually want to set a property that was named '${foo}', since you'd never
be able to get at its value. (Maybe we should add some error-checking to
prevent people from doing that very thing :)
Diane
=====
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!
http://greetings.yahoo.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
