On Tue, 27 Nov 2001 13:32, Bruce Atherton wrote:
> At 08:41 PM 11/26/2001 -0500, you wrote:
> >Here are some things within Ant's core that rely on property mutability:
> >
> > <tstamp>
>
> I'm not sure this is what you are proposing, but if you change <tstamp> so
> that DSTAMP and TSTAMP become immutable, you will lose what I consider a
> very valuable ability. Right now, you can find out how long each section of
> your build takes, which can be very valuable information. It let's you make
> optimizations more effectively, for example.
>
> What I am talking about is something like this:
>
> <target name="build" depends="init,checkout,compile />
>
> <target name="init" >
> <tstamp />
> <echo message="Started Build - ${DSTAMP} ${TSTAMP}" />
> </target>
>
> <target name="checkout" depends="init,do-checkout">
> <tstamp />
> <echo message="Finished Checkout - ${DSTAMP} ${TSTAMP}" />
> </target>
>
> <target name="compile" depends="init,do-compile">
> <tstamp />
> <echo message="Finished Compile - ${DSTAMP} ${TSTAMP}" />
> </target>
>
> Well, you get the idea. This is quite useful information to have and I'd
> hate to see it go just because you are chasing after the hobgoblin of
> consistency.
You can still have this information even if we have immutability. Just use a
different name to save time in. Possibly "starttime" and "endtime" ? ;)
--
Cheers,
Pete
------------------------------------------
I just hate 'yes' men, don't you Smithers?
------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
