On 6/9/05, Antoine Levy-Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --- > > Von: Eric Tchepannou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > An: user@ant.apache.org > > Betreff: Re: What is the difference between a nested element and a nested > > type? > > Datum: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 10:32:51 +0100 > > > > Thanks a lot for that Antoine. That was very clear to me. > > I was able to check at > > http://www.oracle.com/technology/pub/articles/bodewig_taskwriters.html > > and I think the correct syntax (at least the one used there) to nest > > types is > > public void addSomething(BaseType t); > this one means : > - map <something/> to instantiating BaseType > - and creates the BaseType from the nested element <something/>
And any other subclass of the BaseType I suppose... > > > > I have been using > > public void add(BaseType); > > and experience problems with this syntax. I will later rewrite my code > > accordingly and see how it behaves. > > > > My guess is that public void add(BaseType) is obsolete. I use 1.6.2. I > > am just wondering why the Ant documentation keeps mentioning this... > > > No, it is not obsolete, but it will only work if you are mapping BaseType to > an XML tag name such as <basetype/> using the <typedef/> task before. Yep! In another thread, I was advised to use the loaderref attribute as well here. Thanks again, > > > Eric > > > Antoine > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Best Regards, Eric Tchepannou --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
