-Mail); William E Caputo
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task
or have scan for all nant objects - it might need renaming in
that case. Maybe or somthing like that.
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.
You'd probably want to call it then.
Damir
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian
MacLean
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 4:06 AM
To: Jaroslaw Kowalski
Cc: Nant-Developers (E-Mail); William E Caputo
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION:
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, Ian MacLean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Path combine just does its best to create a resonable path string
> from the inouts you pass it.
Ah, I see.
sets foo to ${basedir}/bar in Ant. This would probably be the closest
thing then.
> I don't believe the available task cur
Not quite. Path combine just does its best to create a resonable path
string from the inouts you pass it. It doesn't actually verify that the
path exists or do any searching on the PATH.
Having said that - a task or function would be a great addition
to nant.
I don't believe the available tas
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, Gert Driesen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If we decide to add William's task, I think we should :
[...]
> - split it up into at least 3 tasks, like Ant has : dirname,
> basename, and path-combine (or something, doesn't exist in Ant)
Well, it would probably be called or somet
- Original Message -
From: "Ian MacLean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jaroslaw Kowalski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Gert Driesen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Nant-Developers (E-Mail)"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, December 15, 200
Yeah,
And now we have an excellent definition of what should be a task and
what should be a function - that we can add to the docs. One of us needs
to play devils advocate - quite often its been me :).
Ian
Jaroslaw Kowalski wrote:
PS. Sorry if I sometimes sound negative about expression suppo
Hmm - thats got me thinking. Currently we auto load 3 types of nant
objects - Tasks, types and now functions. However there is only the one
corresponding task -
I'm wondering if we should either :
add two extra tasks and
or have scan for all nant objects - it might need renaming in
that case
Jarek:
>See attached code for actual code used to implement path::* functions.
That looks great, thanks!
Best,
Bill
William E. Caputo
ThoughtWorks, Inc.
http://www.williamcaputo.com
idia ktesis, koine chresis
---
This SF.net email
Hi William!
> Will functions be like tasks in that they can be written separately,
> dropped in and just be available (e.g. by placing MyProjectFunctions.dll
> in the nant bin)?
Exactly. That's what Ian has implemented. Perhaps you'll be able to load
functions on demand with something like task.
> Also, depending on whether functional support is a) soon to be
> incorporated, and b) modular and extensible, I would be willing to rewrite
> the path task's functionality as functions (if they aren't already done).
a) Yes, it's going to be incorporated in nant soon
b) Yes, it's modular and exte
Ian:
>Personally I think this case is fairly clear cut. Any
>task that has a property attribute and whose purpose is to set that
>attribute will be more simply expressed using a function:
FWIW, I agree with this. I wrote the path task simply to make it
unnecessary to have to use a script task o
Gert:
>I'm definitely not saying that we should provide a task alternative for
>every function we support in the expression eval, but by not providing
task
>support for "basic" build "tasks", we're actually forcing build authors
to
>use expression support ...
I look at the separation between tas
>
> PS. Sorry if I sometimes sound negative about expression support ... I
> really like and appreciate what you've done so far, but I just want to be
> sure we're doing the right thing and not let you guys get carried away in
> your enthousiasm too fast :-) But I agree that its really exciting s
s (E-Mail)"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 3:08 PM
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task
> Ok. Should we do something with uptodatefile before the merge? If we do
so,
> we can deprecate as well.
>
> Jarek
>
> - Original Message -
EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "William E Caputo"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Nant-Developers (E-Mail)"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 2:14 PM
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task
> Sounds good to me.
>
> Ian
> Jaroslaw Kowalski wrote:
>
>
ski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Gert Driesen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "William E Caputo"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Nant-Developers (E-Mail)"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 12:57 PM
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task
"Gert Driesen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "William E Caputo"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Nant-Developers (E-Mail)"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 12:57 PM
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task
> +1 on the if task refactoring. I'm not
+1 on the if task refactoring. I'm not sure about removing
though. I realize that a getenv() function would provide equivalent
functionality, however I like the fact that I just need to do
and then I have access to the environment block without having to call
any more functions. Maybe I have
> Tasks should offer functionality on a much higher level than functions ...
Here's my dream about NAnt:
1. Tasks should actually DO something. That "something" is: compile, create,
delete, XSL transform, update from cvs, send email, run unit tests, install,
uninstall, start/stop services, start/
MAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ian MacLean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "William E Caputo"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Nant-Developers (E-Mail)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 11:21 AM
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task
Guess
least 3 tasks, like Ant has : dirname, basename,
and path-combine (or something, doesn't exist in Ant)
What do you think ?
Gert
- Original Message -
From: "Ian MacLean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "William E Caputo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL
n" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Ian MacLean"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "William E Caputo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Nant-Developers (E-Mail)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 11:48 AM
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Ta
>
Cc: "Nant-Developers (E-Mail)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 11:21 AM
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task
>
>
> Guess this will be the start of many dilemma's ... I'm pretty sure there
> will always be people that prefer xml b
like Ant has : dirname, basename,
and path-combine (or something, doesn't exist in Ant)
What do you think ?
Gert
- Original Message -
From: "Ian MacLean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "William E Caputo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Se
m E. Caputo
ThoughtWorks, Inc.
http://www.williamcaputo.com
idia ktesis, koine chresis
Ian MacLean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12/13/2003 10:38 PM
To: William E Caputo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION:
This looks good William. However I'm thinking that the new function
support will be easier to use to do this kind of stuff.
the following path related functions will be included:
path.changeextension
path.combine
path.getdirectoryname
path.getextension
path.getfilename
path
27 matches
Mail list logo
