Greetings all, Having combed through Hatcher & Loughran's chapter on writing custom tasks (very good BTW), I am still a bit perplexed as to how ant resolves addXXX calls against nested tags. What is not clear to me is how the XXX portion is used in conjunction with the argument type.
I have a task which is responsible for processing commands. I define an abstract class which extends DataType and then subclass it for various commands: Get, GenericCommand, etc. The addXXX method on my command processing task can then take an AbstractCommand object to work its magic. If I write the addXXX signature as: addAbstractCommand(AbstractCommand c), will the nested command objects be properly populated even if they contain getters and setters which are not overriden from AbstractCommand? Do I need to add multiple addXXX signatures: AddGet(AbstractCommand c), AddGenericCommand(AbstractCommand c). (This seems completely backwards). In short, what is the cash value of the XXX portion of addXXX if we can determine type info from the argument? Probably I am missing something basic. Forgive me. John-Mason Shackelford Software Developer NCS Pearson - Measurement Services 2510 North Dodge St. Iowa City, IA 52245 319-354-9200x6214 [EMAIL PROTECTED] **************************************************************************** This email may contain confidential material. If you were not an intended recipient, Please notify the sender and delete all copies. We may monitor email to and from our network. **************************************************************************** -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
