> I've intentionally sensationalized the subject. Don't be offended. > > Why use Ant for things like telnet, VSS, .NET, looping > scripts, etc.? I'm > all for Ant as a build tool and tool for general > development-related Java > stuff like deploying apps or running command line, > non-interactive, Java > tools. But Ant's lousy for working with interactive > programs, controlling > GUIs, and anything requiring complex flow control logic. > People in denial > of this fundamental truth will do anything to compensate for Ant's > limitations.
In the build procedure at work, due to historical reasons I *only* use Ant for VSS work - simply because it's much better at getting the job done than anything else is, and *much* better than hand labelling lots of projects. The .NET tasks aren't necessarily interactive, or controlling GUIs or anything else. Similarly telnet is fine when it's doing *exactly* what you expect it to - and the build can fail if you don't get the response you're expecting. If you could give better alternatives for all of the tasks which you think Ant is no good at, it would make your case a lot stronger. Jon -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
