> Probably the biggest flaw in your argument is to > have > lumped together Make and Ant as equivalents. Ant > is clearly much easier and much more powerful and > much more portable than Make. That's why Ant is > attractive. It has little to do with dependency > tracking.
I have to defend Jerry here - this smacks too much of the "newer is always better" thought. Make is better than Ant - in certain circumstances. Try building C programs with Ant and you'll see what I mean. I will agree that Ant is far, far better than Make at building most Java programs. As for your templating approach, give XSLT a try instead of scripting. It's very powerful for this use, and has the huge advantage of expressing your build files in only one language - XML. With XSLT, you can define new tags for all kinds of things - even for generating multiple Ant targets, for standard property init sections, for standard target sets, etc. roger __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online! http://photos.yahoo.com/
