On Monday 17 November 2003 15:57, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, peter reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > An example:
> > <target name="s">
> > <macrodef name="show">
> > <element name="x"/>
> > <sequential>
> > <property name="inmacro" value="Set in macro"/>
> > <x/>
> > </sequential>
> > </macrodef>
> >
> > <show>
> > <x>
> > <echo>inmacro is '${inmacro}'</echo>
> > </x>
> > </show>
> > </target>
> > This shows:
> >
> > s:
> > inmacro is 'Set in macro'
> >
> > It would be very difficult to stop this.
>
> So we must ask outselves whether this is good or bad for us.
>
> If the property inmacro has been defined before the macro invocation,
> the task inside the macro will be a noop - the user gets the expected
> behavior.
>
> If it has not been set, well, this might come unexpected.
I suppose it depends on how one sees macrodef. Treated as
a simple macro substition:
<macrodef name="show">
<element name="x"/>
<sequential>
<property name="inmacro" value="Set in macro"/>
<x/>
</sequential>
</macrodef>
<target name="s">
<show>
<x>
<echo>inmacro is '${inmacro}'</echo>
</x>
</show>
</target>
the target "s" would become:
<target name="s">
<sequential>
<property name="inmacro" value="Set in macro"/>
<echo>inmacro is '${inmacro}'</echo>
</sequential>
</target>
And the above will behave the same as the macrodef version.
>
> But there will never be any double expansion, right? I mean,
>
> <echo>inmacro is '$${inmacro}'</echo>
>
> would always result in
>
> > s:
> > inmacro is '${inmacro}'
Yes with the current implementation (not with some of my intermediate
implementations...)
Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
