Yeah, sorry, I was confused! I liked this concept very much, and from what
Peter said, it still resulted in static dependency checking of the target
graph, so not much different from existing Ant, just *way more convenient*.
And by making the <depend> sub-element take a <condition>, as I showed
trivial to add (or hack as some people said), then you don't even have to
come up with a property name, and can do something like:
<target name="x">
<do-something/>
<depend target="y">
<condition>
<istrue property="do-something-set"/>
</condition>
</depend>
</target>
Even without the nested <condition>, and just plain if/unless attribute
(that could be extended to istrue/isfalse/os/osfamily), it much more
*convenient* that the current mechanism. Having the ability to do something
the hard/ugly way shouldn't prevent improvements to do it better. --DD
-----Original Message-----
From: Conor MacNeill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2002 10:04 AM
To: Ant Users List
Subject: Re: conditional copy
Dominique Devienne wrote:
>
> Conor's proposal allowing to do:
>
> <target name="x">
> <do-something/>
> <depend target="x"
> if="do-something-set-property"/>
> </target>
>
I think you will find that this is Peter Donald's concept. Credit where
credit is due.
Conor
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
