On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Conor MacNeill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sure. Let me push the C/C++ analogy a little further.
Leaving this analogy aside ... In the particular case you've mentioned (checkstyle.xml using build.xml) I'm absolutely with Ken, farm out the common stuff and import it from both. Use composition instead of inheritance. > The analogy with Ant breaks when we talk about target overriding > which will be a useful usecase. Yes, here we are talking about <import> as a method of inheritance, so we are using the same task for two different concepts. Maybe this is the cause of confusion and should be amended by either using two different tasks or an attribute? It almost seems as if you'd want different basedir semantics depending on which concept we are talking about. I'm not really sure, which semantics we want to use, but if the basedir of the importing file always wins, I fail to see how I can do an import in an imported file. If A imports B and B imports C, how does B address C if all relative paths depend on A's basedir, that B cannot even pretend to know about? Stefan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
