Hi,
* Troy Laurin wrote on 13.07.2004 (10:17):
> Are you suggesting using the namespace for the class implementing the
> task, when referencing the task in the build file? This seems like it
> could be excessively verbose, to me.
Well, I always use a short namespace. So I actually don't
thought that it may get longer. What about using a task
attribute [TaskNamespace("Sascha")] which forces me to use
<Sascha:TaskName>...</Sascha:TaskName>?
> [Conflicting task scenary]
Yes, you're right. I just haven't thought of this yet.
> I appreciate the need for convenience, but since namespaces are a tool
> for a correctness problem, it's not valid to compromise correctness for
> convenience.
May the proposed namespace attribute be a compronmise
between convenience and too long namespaces?
-sa
--
sa at programmers-world dot com http://www.livingit.de
Internet sites:
http://www.not2long.net - Make long links short
Boomarks online: http://www.mobile-bookmarks.info
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training.
Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 -
digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches,
unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com
_______________________________________________
nant-developers mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-developers
