+1,
It would however be nicer to make macrodef
more generic. To inject the UEs into the macro
instance.
Like:
<macrodef name="engine">
<attribute name="impl">
<dom>
<service type="javax.script.ScriptEngineFactory"
provider="@{impl}"/>
</dom>
</macrodef>
<jar jarfile="x.jar">
<fileset dir="classes"/>
<engine impl="org.me.SimpleLang"/>
</jar>
Do not know if it is possible.
Peter
On 9/26/06, Alexey Solofnenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1 Good idea, Matt.
- Alexey.
On 9/26/06, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It strikes me that we don't have a utility to
> declaratively build custom conditions from others;
> macrodef would seem the obvious choice for, e.g.:
>
> <macrodef name="isEmptyFile">
> <attribute name="file" />
> <sequential>
> <and>
> <available file="@{file}" type="file" />
> <length file="@{file}" length="0" />
> </and>
> </sequential>
> </macrodef>
>
> But the result amounts to a Task: executable, but
> unavailable for use where conditions would be
> available.
>
> Would it make sense to allow this by allowing a nested
> <condition> as an alternative to <sequential>? Then
> cloning the MacroInstance class to MacroCondition
> implements Condition, for use when <condition> is
> specified? Cloning the entire MacroDef/MacroInstance
> family to have an entirely new task feels a little
> extreme to me here...
>
> Alternative suggestions?
>
> TIA,
> Matt
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
--
Alexey N. Solofnenko trelony at gmail.com
home: http://trelony.cjb.net/
Pleasant Hill, CA (GMT-8 hours usually)
