Adam Murdoch wrote > Absolutely. There was an implicit gap between switching the default and > deprecating the ant based implementation, just like we did for the Java > and Groovy compilers. So, in the 1.4/1.5 timeframe we'd switch the > defaults, and maybe 3 or 4 releases after that think about deprecating the > Ant based implementation.
OK. I'd also like to give it some time before we make our Zinc integration the default. Adam Murdoch wrote > Why would you want to do non-incremental compilation? Just curious. Two reasons: 1. It saves time for a full compilation (roughly 20 to 60 percent based on the data I have). 2. It cuts out the incremental compile logic, which is complicated (implemented as a compiler plugin) and still has to prove it can keep up with new Scala releases, changes to scalac, stay backward compatible, etc. So at least for now, I consider it worthwhile to have a fallback to a simpler solution that's known to be rock solid. There's nothing worse than not being able to compile your code anymore, or being tied to a particular Scala or Gradle version. Cheers, Peter -- View this message in context: http://gradle.1045684.n5.nabble.com/Next-steps-in-improving-our-Scala-support-tp5710388p5710400.html Sent from the gradle-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
