James Duncan Davidson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 11/15/00 12:13 AM, "Stefan Bodewig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Personally I don't care much which regexp processor is going to be >> used, maybe we could even put an interface layer in between so the >> user can choose which processor to use (like style does for Xalan >> or XSL:P). Not that high a priority though. > > I'd rather not make things *that* flexible. :) If we are going to > have one regexp engine or another in our build, we should just > depend on it being checked out along side and build it in. :) >
Well, what I'd really like was a standard API for regexp processors in javax.regexp package and code to that. I've been thinking about coding up a RegexpMapper implementation of org.apache.tools.ant.util.FileNameMapper once I get there. As I don't know either jakarta regexp engine I would have tended to use jakarta-regexp *because* it is a lot smaller. I agree we shouldn't use two different engines within Ant, that's why I came up with the interface layer. Guess I'll use ORO in a first step. Stefan
