On Fri, 31 Oct 2003, Antoine Levy-Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> What are the advantages of leaving macrodef with attributes
> implemented as textual substitutions ?
attributes don't hide properties.
If we implement attributes as properties, we have to decide whether
they are allowed to override existing (user-)properties of the same
name as well. I don't think it would be problematic, as long as we
state the rules clear enough.
If they are only textual substitutions, they get confusing when we use
the property expansion syntax.
> Otherwise, of course, if we leave macrodef as it is with just a new
> notation for the attributes, then we can release 1.6 sooner.
I'd rather get this "right" as in community supported and unlikely to
break bc in Ant 1.7 now.
> If we choose a notation $() for macro attributes (for instance), can
> we implement macrodef with <local/> in 1.7 ?
You mean we make them textual replacements now and set (local)
properties in 1.7? This would imply that attributes that didn't hide
properties in 1.6 would do so now. And should we decide that
attributes must not override existing properties, this suddenly would
have to apply to $() instead of ${} as well.
Stefan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
