Give them choice ... do both! Just share the code-base :)

----------------------------------------
- Mitch Denny
- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- http://www.monash.net
- +61 (414) 610141
-  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian MacLean [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Monday, 8 December 2003 3:28 PM
> To: Mitch Denny
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [nant-dev] SUMMARY: Expression Syntax
> 
> I don't think it is - is it ? Maybe the suggestion was that 
> xmlpeek could be implemented as a function rather than a task ie :
> 
> <property name="foo" value="${xmlpeek( 'somefile.xml', 
> '\\somexpathexpr'}" />
> 
> 
> I think there will probably be a number of borderline cases where its 
> uncertain whether a given piece of functionality should be a 
> task or a 
> function.
> 
> Ian
> 
> >I didn't realise xmlpeek was on the chopping block. Any particular
> >reason?
> >
> >----------------------------------------
> >- Mitch Denny
> >- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >- http://www.monash.net
> >- +61 (414) 610141
> >-  
> >
> >  
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Jaroslaw Kowalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> >>Sent: Monday, 8 December 2003 8:47 AM
> >>To: Scott Hernandez; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>Subject: Re: [nant-dev] SUMMARY: Expression Syntax
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>Good point about side-effects. This does paint a clear 
> distinction. 
> >>>But
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>then
> >>    
> >>
> >>>you get tasks like xmlpoke, with no corresponding xmlpeek; 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>this might 
> >>    
> >>
> >>>make the user search around for the expression/function to use, or 
> >>>even assume that this functionality does not exist.
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>You're right. Perhaps xmlpeek should stay.
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>I'm inclined to give this a day or two to stew, commit the 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>changes to 
> >>    
> >>
> >>>the head, if there are no serious issues. We doc, write 
> unit tests, 
> >>>and do a release with expression support in a week or less.
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>That would be great!
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>We can also put a switch in our config section, and a command line 
> >>>option, to turn it off, as you have suggested.
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>I'll implement this in EE-patches + I'll write some html docs 
> >>and make "test2" release for developers when I'm ready. When 
> >>it's ok we'll move the patches to the main trunk. Ok?
> >>
> >>Jarek
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>-------------------------------------------------------
> >>This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.
> >>Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive?  Does it 
> >>help you create better code?  SHARE THE LOVE, and help us 
> >>help YOU!  Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/ 
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>nant-developers mailing list
> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-developers
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >
> >-------------------------------------------------------
> >This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.
> >Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive?  Does it
> >help you create better code?  SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help
> >YOU!  Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/
> >_______________________________________________
> >nant-developers mailing list
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-developers
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Ian MacLean, Developer, 
> ActiveState, a division of Sophos
> http://www.ActiveState.com
> 
> 
> 


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.
Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive?  Does it
help you create better code?  SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help
YOU!  Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/
_______________________________________________
nant-developers mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-developers

Reply via email to