Part of this has to do with the language, and the optimizations that the
compiler make with respect to static and final methods and the fact that
method bindings are done at compile time, unless using reflection.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Denis, Ronald J (Ronald)** CTR ** [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 1:50 PM
> To: JDE Mailing List
> Subject: RE: PROPOSAL: New Java Build Feature
>
>
> I too use ant for my builds. It does not compile
> every file every time. However, admittedly there have
> been times when compile errors occur which only go away
> upon a full rebuild. This doesn't happen often but does
> happen often enough that its annoying.
>
> Ron Denis
> E-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Consultant
> Lucent Technologies Inc.
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mark Bucciarelli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 1:49 PM
> > To: Paul Kinnucan; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Cc: Stephane; Richard den Adel; JDE Mailing List
> > Subject: RE: PROPOSAL: New Java Build Feature
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Paul Kinnucan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 1:23 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Cc: Stephane; Richard den Adel; JDE Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: PROPOSAL: New Java Build Feature
> > {snip!}
> >
> > > >> In any event, my proposal can be combined with make or
> ant. All I
> > > >> am suggesting is that instead of trying to compile
> every class in
> > > >> your project, ant or make could compile only one: a compile
> > > >> master that references every class in your project. The Java
> > > >> compiler would then make sure that all files that needed to be
> > > >> compiled would be compiled. I think this approach, which I did
> > > >> not originate, is brilliant.
> >
> > I'm going to jump in here. I get the sense there's been a
> fair amount
> > of back and forth here on this proposal. I searched the archives
> > looking for how to use Ant with JDE and read five or six posts
> > regarding Paul's proposal, so perhaps there are others that have not
> > yet been posted there ... but anyway, here goes ...
> >
> > I'm using Ant 1.3 and the <javac> task only compiles the
> classes that
> > need recompiling. Perhaps they have over-ridden the behavior of
> > javac--if you're curious, you can take a look at the source for the
> > javac task on Apache's webCVS page.
> >
> > I have been using Ant in conjunction with JUnit 3.5 for the past two
> > weeks and I can't recommend it strongly enough.
> >
> > I am starting to think about my classes so they are "testable" which
> > means I think about the interface first and foremost. A side-effect
> > is that I try to minimize the interface so I don't have to
> write many
> > test methods.
> >
> > I'm starting to write my test code first, and then the production
> > code. When the production code passes the test, I'm done. I've
> > become much more aggressive in refactoring code that I have tests
> > written for; I am (fairly :) confident that if it passes the tests,
> > then I'm done.
> >
> > I would suggest using the functionality built into Ant for
> dependency
> > checking when building. Again, sorry if this rehashes
> stuff that has
> > already been covered in gory detail, but I just signed (back) on to
> > the list today.
> >
>
