You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@jakarta.apache.org by Jon Stevens <jo...@latchkey.com> on 2001/05/16 04:05:22 UTC

FW: if and unless attributes for all Tasks

This is such a great discussion, I just had to open it up to a more general
group.

The Ant group is discussing the fact that putting conditional statements
into XML is a terrible idea, yet JSP/Struts is doing exactly that with
taglibs.

Am I the only one who sees the disconnect here?

    <http://jakarta.apache.org/struts/struts-logic.html>

-jon

------ Forwarded Message
From: Jason_Henriksen@providian.com
Reply-To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 16:27:25 -0700
To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org, rvaughn@pobox.com
Subject: RE: if and unless attributes for all Tasks

>Build scripting is all ABOUT conditional processing -
>i.e. "if source file A is newer than object file B,
>compile source file A."

>This low-level conditional checking is built into Ant
>(and make) so that you don't have to see it - and that
>is the primary advantage of build tools over scripting
>tools - it simplifies the required instruction set.

>This does not, however, eliminate the need for
>conditionals at a higher level of abstraction.  Also,
>I have several times had to use the uptodate task
>paired with the if/unless conditions to achieve checks
>that are *not* built into Ant - and this is
>conceptually at the *same* level of abstraction of the
>.java/.class checks.

I think what Jesse was saying  (At least, what I so strongly agreed with)
is that XML is not a good language for doing if/checks and what not.  If
you
need to do logic, even simple logic, you're better off to write a task in
Java and have
all of the power that a real procedural/OO language can give you or use
different build scripts.

Instead, we should keep ANT in a make style of dependencies and make things
as simple and approachable as
possible.  ANT dependencies are hard enough to wade through if you're new
to a large build.xml.  As you add
more and more control structures, ANT becomes decreasingly accessible and
then losses what I consider to be
a big part of it's value.


                                    Jason Henriksen

------ End of Forwarded Message


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org


Re: FW: if and unless attributes for all Tasks

Posted by e_teer <e_...@yahoo.com>.
Renders in Mozilla .9 / Win2KP

-Ellis Teer

On Wed, 16 May 2001 13:07:30 -0400, Eric Hancock wrote:
>Funny -- that page doesn't render on my Mozilla .9 / Linux / x86.
>
>Jon Stevens wrote:
>
>
>> The Ant group is discussing the fact that putting conditional
>>statements
>> into XML is a terrible idea, yet JSP/Struts is doing exactly that
>>with
>> taglibs.
>>
>> Am I the only one who sees the disconnect here?
>>
>>   <http://jakarta.apache.org/struts/struts-logic.html>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------

>To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org


-- e_teer, e_teer@yahoo.com on 05/18/2001


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org


Re: FW: if and unless attributes for all Tasks

Posted by Eric Hancock <er...@bitpuddle.com>.
Funny -- that page doesn't render on my Mozilla .9 / Linux / x86.

Jon Stevens wrote:

 
> The Ant group is discussing the fact that putting conditional statements
> into XML is a terrible idea, yet JSP/Struts is doing exactly that with
> taglibs.
> 
> Am I the only one who sees the disconnect here?
> 
>     <http://jakarta.apache.org/struts/struts-logic.html>




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org


Re: FW: if and unless attributes for all Tasks

Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@optonline.net>.
When I ran across it in XSL, two words came to mind : 'scope creep'.

I don't know the history of XSL, but that couldn't be what people were
thinking in the beginning.

geir

Jon Stevens wrote:
> 
> This is such a great discussion, I just had to open it up to a more general
> group.
> 
> The Ant group is discussing the fact that putting conditional statements
> into XML is a terrible idea, yet JSP/Struts is doing exactly that with
> taglibs.
> 
> Am I the only one who sees the disconnect here?
> 
>     <http://jakarta.apache.org/struts/struts-logic.html>
> 
> -jon
> 
> ------ Forwarded Message
> From: Jason_Henriksen@providian.com
> Reply-To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 16:27:25 -0700
> To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org, rvaughn@pobox.com
> Subject: RE: if and unless attributes for all Tasks
> 
> >Build scripting is all ABOUT conditional processing -
> >i.e. "if source file A is newer than object file B,
> >compile source file A."
> 
> >This low-level conditional checking is built into Ant
> >(and make) so that you don't have to see it - and that
> >is the primary advantage of build tools over scripting
> >tools - it simplifies the required instruction set.
> 
> >This does not, however, eliminate the need for
> >conditionals at a higher level of abstraction.  Also,
> >I have several times had to use the uptodate task
> >paired with the if/unless conditions to achieve checks
> >that are *not* built into Ant - and this is
> >conceptually at the *same* level of abstraction of the
> >.java/.class checks.
> 
> I think what Jesse was saying  (At least, what I so strongly agreed with)
> is that XML is not a good language for doing if/checks and what not.  If
> you
> need to do logic, even simple logic, you're better off to write a task in
> Java and have
> all of the power that a real procedural/OO language can give you or use
> different build scripts.
> 
> Instead, we should keep ANT in a make style of dependencies and make things
> as simple and approachable as
> possible.  ANT dependencies are hard enough to wade through if you're new
> to a large build.xml.  As you add
> more and more control structures, ANT becomes decreasingly accessible and
> then losses what I consider to be
> a big part of it's value.
> 
>                                     Jason Henriksen
> 
> ------ End of Forwarded Message
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org

-- 
Geir Magnusson Jr.                           geirm@optonline.net
System and Software Consulting
Developing for the web?  See http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
"still climbing up to the shoulders..."

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org