I think in general it is not a good idea.
The code in question is:
in Target#execute
Iterator it = children.iterator();
Object o = it.next();
if (o instanceof Task) {
Task task = (Task) o;
task.perform();
} else {
RuntimeConfigurable r = (RuntimeConfigurable) o;
r.maybeConfigure(project);
}
This was:
Enumeration enum = children.elements();
while (enum.hasMoreElements()) {
Object o = enum.nextElement();
if (o instanceof Task) {
Task task = (Task) o;
task.perform();
} else {
RuntimeConfigurable r = (RuntimeConfigurable) o;
r.maybeConfigure(project);
}
The first picks up the fact that children has been modified
while it is being iterated, and the second does not. (See
src.zip/../Vector#elements()).
I am not sure that that depending on an undocumented (I think)
feature of Vector/Enumeration is a good idea. So to support this feature
one would have to modify the way the task list of a target is
visitied.
Peter.
On Mon, 2003-07-07 at 08:37, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On 04 Jul 2003, peter reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The test code in question was inserting tasks
> > into the current target, and this does not
> > seem to be a good idea.
>
> In general or just after the code change?
>
> If we agree that adding tasks to the current target is no good idea in
> general (I'm not sure), we should document it - otherwise it might be
> better to revert that part of the Target changes as well as your
> changes to the test and fix the situation.
>
> Stefan
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
