the condition on
the right antlib.
For the syntax of the language itself, any of the ones proposed is fine.
Jose Alberto
> -Original Message-
> From: Dominique Devienne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 11 May 2004 17:28
> To: 'Ant Developers List'
>
Dominique Devienne wrote:
From: Alexey N. Solofnenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Actually is too wordy. A mall is translated into
Complex conditions are big. A small expression language like "XXX &&
YYY" would be much nicer.
I so agree with you! That expression language could (should IMHO!) be XPat
"Jack J. Woehr" wrote:
> Hmm, this is something interesting for Ant in itself.
>
> truevalue="yes was 9" />
>
> Is there an expression evaluating jar that could be added to optional?
There's the Math task in Ant-Contrib which does part of this.
And
Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
> But this would require defining a proper expression evaluation language
> for it.
Hmm, this is something interesting for Ant in itself.
Is there an expression evaluating jar that could be added to optional?
--
Jack J. Woehr # We have gone from the hor
ot something simple at all.
Jose Alberto
-Original Message-
From: Alexey N. Solofnenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 11 May 2004 17:10
To: Ant Developers List
Subject: Re: ANT 1.7 features suggestion
Actually is too wordy. A mall is
translated into
Complex conditions are bi
simple at all.
Jose Alberto
> -Original Message-
> From: Alexey N. Solofnenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 11 May 2004 17:10
> To: Ant Developers List
> Subject: Re: ANT 1.7 features suggestion
>
>
> Actually is too wordy. A mal
> From: Alexey N. Solofnenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Actually is too wordy. A mall is translated into
>
> Complex conditions are big. A small expression language like "XXX &&
> YYY" would be much nicer.
I so agree with you! That expression language could (should IMHO!) be XPath
(JXpath o
Actually is too wordy. A mall is translated into
Complex conditions are big. A small expression language like "XXX &&
YYY" would be much nicer.
- Alexey.
Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
From: Alexey N. Solofnenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I do use it also. Do you know whethe
> From: Alexey N. Solofnenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I do use it also. Do you know whether it will become a part
> of main ANT?
>
So why you feel unconfortable about using is the fact that is not
part of the supported CORE of ANT. Is that it?
That may give some food for thought, to the
Ant Developers List
Subject: Re: ANT 1.7 features suggestion
Frequently I need several properties to be checked to enable
or disable
a target. A boolean expression would be much better than a list of
properties, but I would be happy with just a list. I think if should
have && inside and u
Ok, what is wrong with using ?
Besides, look&feel.
Jose Alberto
> -Original Message-
> From: Alexey N. Solofnenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 11 May 2004 15:33
> To: Ant Developers List
> Subject: Re: ANT 1.7 features suggestion
>
>
> Frequently I n
Frequently I need several properties to be checked to enable or disable
a target. A boolean expression would be much better than a list of
properties, but I would be happy with just a list. I think if should
have && inside and unless should have ||.
- Alexey.
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Tue, 04 Ma
On Tue, 04 May 2004, Alexey N. Solofnenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Could you please also update if and unless to accept a list of
> properties?
if="A, B" would mean "A is set and B is set" or "A is set or B is
set"?
You know that propertiy names are allowed to contain spaces and commas
and a
I'm soo late for the party that I'll try to not restart the whole
thing.
On Tue, 04 May 2004, Anthony Goubard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1) Integrate if and unless at the Task level.
A nested would be far more powerful, as would be an
task. Don't expect any opinion from me. 8-)
> 3) Reg
I'm soo late for the party that I'll try to not restart the whole
thing.
On Tue, 04 May 2004, Anthony Goubard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1) Integrate if and unless at the Task level.
A nested would be far more powerful, as would be an
task. Don't expect any opinion from me. 8-)
> 3) Reg
Dale Anson wrote:
AntContrib has a couple of tasks that handle this specific situation,
see and . is analogous to ,
is analogous to , both allow returning property
values set in the remote target. Also see AntContrib's or
Antelope's task (these are identical) which call a target in
the s
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1) Integrate if and unless at the Task level.
This would allow all ANT tasks to have the if and unless
attribute (the
same way that it has an id attribute).
So far the only way to do it is by using except if
you use one
of the task which has already the "if" "unless" a
> From: Dominique Devienne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > From: Jose Alberto Fernandez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > But we already have all this in our ANT conditions. So why
> do we want
> > to redefine them again with a new syntax? How do you add new
> > conditions? Because the need for ne
> From: Jose Alberto Fernandez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > From: Dominique Devienne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > From: Jose Alberto Fernandez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > -100 :-\
> > >
> > > IMHO, if/unless in targets are one of the worst features we have in
> > > the ANT language.
>
> From: Dominique Devienne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > From: Jose Alberto Fernandez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > -100 :-\
> >
> > IMHO, if/unless in targets are one of the worst features we have in
> > the ANT language.
>
> I'm completely at the other end of the spectrum! I think
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
6) Get the properties from a target after antcall
At the moment if you have a target that define some properties, the
only way to call it in order to get the values is using "depends".
This is a problem as you may want to invoke your target not
necessary
at the beginn
> From: Jose Alberto Fernandez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> -100 :-\
>
> IMHO, if/unless in targets are one of the worst features we have in the
> ANT language.
I'm completely at the other end of the spectrum! I think if/unless, and
extension of these that I coded up in my custom tasks/types, m
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 05 May 2004 01:26
> To: Ant Developers List
> Subject: Re: ANT 1.7 features suggestion
>
>
> Could you please also update if and unless to accept a list
> of properties?
>
> - Alexey.
>
> Sullivan, Sean C - MWT wrote:
>
>
After the task, what about this, that downloads 'plugins' and
s them?
http://antworks.sourceforge.net/
http://url-to/plugin/"; />
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgo
> 1) Integrate if and unless at the Task level.
> This would allow all ANT tasks to have the if and unless
> attribute (the
> same way that it has an id attribute).
> So far the only way to do it is by using except if
> you use one
> of the task which has already the "if" "unless" attributes
Could you please also update if and unless to accept a list of properties?
- Alexey.
Sullivan, Sean C - MWT wrote:
+1
-Original Message-
From: Anthony Goubard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
A few weeks ago, there was a discussion about the new features in ANT
1.7.
[...]
1) Integrate i
+1
> -Original Message-
> From: Anthony Goubard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> A few weeks ago, there was a discussion about the new features in ANT
1.7.
>
> [...]
>
> 1) Integrate if and unless at the Task level.
> This would allow all ANT tasks to have the if and unless attribute
(the
Hi,
I understand your point as 2 months ago I was still running Windows 98
(first edition ;-)) and developing a swing program that could run with
Java 1.1.8
As I wrote in my answer to Steve, Ant would still work the same for jdk
1.2 users, it's just a way to reduce the number of jar files in the
Steve Loughran wrote:
Anthony Goubard wrote:
Hello,
A few weeks ago, there was a discussion about the new features in ANT
1.7.
I've made a list of features that I think would be useful in ANT and
that I'd like to discuss on this mailing list.
Maybe some of you would have a usage of these new fea
-Original Message-
From: Anthony Goubard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 12:01 PM
To: Ant Developers List
Subject: ANT 1.7 features suggestion
Hello,
- I think that more than 50% of the users uses Java 1.4
I think that is unrealistic. In decent to large
Anthony Goubard wrote:
Hello,
A few weeks ago, there was a discussion about the new features in ANT 1.7.
I've made a list of features that I think would be useful in ANT and
that I'd like to discuss on this mailing list.
Maybe some of you would have a usage of these new feature for your
existing
31 matches
Mail list logo
