Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-15 Thread Gert Driesen
- 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, 2003 4:10 AM Subject: Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task Yeah, And now we have

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-15 Thread Stefan Bodewig
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 which or

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-15 Thread Stefan Bodewig
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. property name=foo location=bar/ sets foo to ${basedir}/bar in Ant. This would probably be the closest thing then. I don't

RE: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-15 Thread Damir Simunic
You'd probably want to call it loadextensions / 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

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-15 Thread Ian MacLean
-Developers (E-Mail); William E Caputo Subject: Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task or haveloadtasks scan for all nant objects - it might need renaming in that case. Maybe loadcustom or somthing like that. --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-14 Thread Gert Driesen
, 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] Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 5:38 AM Subject: Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-14 Thread Jaroslaw Kowalski
, December 14, 2003 11:21 AM Subject: Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task start-rant Guess this will be the start of many dilemma's ... I'm pretty sure there will always be people that prefer xml build elements only, and actually that's also one of my concerns ... I'd hate to see build files

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-14 Thread Gert Driesen
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 Task We already have tasks: sysinfo tstamp available if that are basically readonly (they only change properties

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-14 Thread Ian MacLean
: Sunday, December 14, 2003 11:21 AM Subject: Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task start-rant Guess this will be the start of many dilemma's ... I'm pretty sure there will always be people that prefer xml build elements only, and actually that's also one of my concerns ... I'd hate to see build

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-14 Thread Jaroslaw Kowalski
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,

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-14 Thread Ian MacLean
+1 on the if task refactoring. I'm not sure about removing sysinfo though. I realize that a getenv() function would provide equivalent functionality, however I like the fact that I just need to do sysinfo/ and then I have access to the environment block without having to call any more

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-14 Thread Jaroslaw Kowalski
(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 sure about removing sysinfo though. I realize that a getenv() function would provide equivalent functionality, however I like the fact that I

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-14 Thread Ian MacLean
]; 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 sure about removing sysinfo though. I realize that a getenv() function would provide equivalent

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-14 Thread Jaroslaw Kowalski
-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: Should I add Deprecated attribute to propertyexists, propertytrue and taskexists in EE-patches? Jarek

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-14 Thread Gert Driesen
]; 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: Should I add Deprecated attribute to propertyexists, propertytrue

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-14 Thread Jaroslaw Kowalski
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

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-14 Thread William E Caputo
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 tasks and

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-14 Thread William E Caputo
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

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-14 Thread William E Caputo
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

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-14 Thread Ian MacLean
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 - loadtasks I'm wondering if we should either : add two extra tasks loadtypes and loadfunctions or haveloadtasks scan for all nant

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-14 Thread Ian MacLean
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

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-13 Thread Ian MacLean
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

Re: [nant-dev] SUBMISSION: Path Task

2003-12-13 Thread William 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: Path Task This looks good