Hi,
looks quite hard. Will try it some other time.
On 3/16/06, Ralf Bokelberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Probably you could use pathconvert to do the same without using a file.
>
> Good luck,
> Ralf.
>
>
> On 3/16/06, Ray Chuan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > if I'm not wrong here's what you want to do:
> >
> > net.pkg.utils.foo
> >
> > to
> >
> > net/pkg/utils/foo
> >
> > I've not seen any replace tasks except for those meant for handling
> > files. You could do something like this:
> >
> > <target name="replace-class-with-path">
> > <property name="pkg.full" value="net.pkg.utils.foo"/>
> > <property name="temp" value=".temp"/>
> >
> > <echo file="${temp}" message="${pkg.full}"/>
> > <loadfile property="pkg.path" srcfile="${temp}">
> > <filterchain>
> > <replacestring from="." to="/"/>
> > </filterchain>
> > </loadfile>
> > <delete file="${temp}"/>
> > <echo message="${pkg.path}"/>
> > </target>
> >
> > which is lame, because a file is created just for it to work. You
> > could, on the other hand, write your own task, and remove the need for
> > using files.
> >
> > On 3/16/06, Sascha Balkau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Hi folks,
> > >
> > > What is a good way to use the package namespace for the main class in an
> Ant
> > > build file so that it works properly with MTASC?
> > >
> > > Currently when starting a new project in Eclipse, I'm setting up a
> property
> > > in the build file that has the filesystem path to the package in that
> the
> > > main class resides ...
> > >
> > > ...
> > > <property name="mainclass" value=" Main.as"/>
> > > <property name="mainpackage"
> value="somepackage/nestedpackage/"/>
> > > ...
> > > <property name="source" location="src"/>
> > > ...
> > >
> > > Later in the build file I'm using a target to compile with MTASC which
> has
> > > an argument like this ...
> > >
> > > <arg value="-main"/>
> > > <arg value="${source}/${mainpackage}${mainclass}"/>
> > >
> > > This is of course pretty unpractical. It works but I have to enter the
> > > package name with slashes which is a disadvantage when I want to use the
> > > package name for example to create a class file on-the-fly.
> > >
> > > So I was wondering what approach others use to define the package name
> in
> > > their build files?
> > > I'm just starting to use as2ant so I'm not sure how the situation works
> > > there.
> > >
> > >
> > > Sascha
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > osflash mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Ray Chuan
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > osflash mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> osflash mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
>
>
>
--
Ray Chuan
_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
