Re: [Nant-users] convert::to-int deprecated

Stephen Tunney wrote: I'm not sure. All I know is that there is no other method that works. And this "may" be a bug, but the "test" attribute is required. So placing true in there is the only way to get around it. LOOPHOLE :) Have you tried Robert's first syntax, i.e. test="${not pro

RE: [Nant-users] convert::to-int deprecated

MAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Schneider Sent: November 2, 2005 1:13 AM To: Nant-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: RE: [Nant-users] convert::to-int deprecated Is this the regular approach?: > >     //TODO:  Stuff > > > Kind of hoaky, but it works :) Why not

Re: [Nant-users] convert::to-int deprecated

On 11/2/05, Robert Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is this the regular approach?: > > > > > //TODO: Stuff > > > > > > Kind of hoaky, but it works :) > > Why not: > > >//TODO: Stuff > Typo aside, putting the actual positive test in the test attribute is much more expressive (at leas

RE: [Nant-users] convert::to-int deprecated

Is this the regular approach?: > >     //TODO:  Stuff > > > Kind of hoaky, but it works :) Why not: //TODO: Stuff or //TODO: Stuff ? Cheers, Robert --- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Tame your development chall

RE: [Nant-users] convert::to-int deprecated

05 6:08 AM To: Nant-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [Nant-users] convert::to-int deprecated   Hi all,   If the line below is deprecated then what would the new syntax be?   ${convert::to-int(phasenumber) > 1} I also have the same problem with   What would the syntax be for

RE: [Nant-users] convert::to-int deprecated

  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Cowan Sent: November 1, 2005 6:08 AM To: Nant-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [Nant-users] convert::to-int deprecated   Hi all,   If the line below is deprecated then what would the new syntax be?   ${convert

[Nant-users] convert::to-int deprecated

Hi all,   If the line below is deprecated then what would the new syntax be?   ${convert::to-int(phasenumber) > 1} I also have the same problem with   What would the syntax be for the following be: