Stefan Bodewig wrote:
Any chance to get the <available> task a bit extended so
that it can also be used to check for methods, fields,
implemented interfaces etc. and specific properties...
>
Doesn't sound too hard. I wouldn't augment available with it but
rather create a new condition, though.
Any suggestions for a name?
What are the particular rationales to create a new condition
rather than extending <available>? I thought that putting in
declarations for further conditions would be a straightforward
extension:
available class foo with
method foobar(int, int)
and protected static field bar (any type)
and implementing interface xyzzy
Hm, one problem is the syntax for
any method named bar
and
method bar(void).
People will probably assume that no declarations for
parameter types mean the the latter and will wonder
how to do the former. We can just omit the first case
though.
J.Pietschmann
