RE: Ant for J#?

I think this is what people would call a lively debate ;) -Original Message- From: Joseph S. Barrera III [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 09 January 2002 11:08 To: 'Ant Users List' Subject: RE: Ant for J#? > From: Hunt, Bryan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Subjec

RE: Ant for J#?

> From: Hunt, Bryan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Subject: RE: Ant for J#? > > What vile untamed beasts of hades have I unleashed ? How do you think *I* feel? I started this whole thread with what I thought was a simple request... sigh - Joe -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: &l

RE: Ant for J#?

What vile untamed beasts of hades have I unleashed ? b-- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 09 January 2002 10:50 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Ant for J#? > Vive Fortran 77! No no no... Vive COBOL Pe

RE: Ant for J#?

> Vive Fortran 77! No no no... Vive COBOL Peter This email may contain information which is privileged or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, please notify the sender immediately and delete i

RE: Ant for J#?

At 11:07 AM 09/01/02, you wrote: Vive Fortran 77! >Thats just perverse ;-) > >-Original Message- >From: Conor MacNeill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: 09 January 2002 10:14 >To: Ant Users List >Subject: Re: Ant for J#? > > >Hunt, Bryan wrote: >

RE: Ant for J#?

Thats just perverse ;-) -Original Message- From: Conor MacNeill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 09 January 2002 10:14 To: Ant Users List Subject: Re: Ant for J#? Hunt, Bryan wrote: > Given the choice I would much prefer to spend my days > coding > c++ or perl which are

Re: Ant for J#?

Hunt, Bryan wrote: > Given the choice I would much prefer to spend my days > coding > c++ or perl which are both far more enjoyable languages. I get a kick out of assembler :-) Conor -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail:

RE: Ant for J#?

riginal Message- From: Michael J McGonagle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 08 January 2002 20:01 To: Ant Users List Subject: Re: Ant for J#? "Hunt, Bryan" wrote: > > If you think that ant should support J# your missing the point. If microsoft > > want to create disruptive

RE: Ant for J#?

If you look at the way GNU provides its compilers on Solaris, we have the option to compile various source types (C++, Java, etc) although they all use different executables. ANT already has commands in for .NET in its Optional.jar. What is the issue with supporting ANT with J#. Just write a J

Re: Ant for J#?

On Wed, 09 Jan 2002, Bevan Arps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I for one would be hugely in favour of some kind of "generic" > compiler task that can be configured (say through an external > property file) for almost any compiler at all. Combining with should work in (almost) any situation, but

RE: Ant for J#?

as against them. It's then hard to determine what your argument is really based on. Regards, -- Ian > -Original Message- > From: Michael J McGonagle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 1:37 PM > To: Ant Users List > Subject: Re: Ant for J#? &g

Re: Ant for J#?

"MacDonald, Ian" wrote: > > "Microsnort", "Microshlock", "Microslop", "Microshod", come on Michael, tell > us how you really feel about Microsoft. While I'm open to listening to > anyone's opinion, when I see references such as this, I find it a little > hard to look past their biased views. Wh

RE: Ant for J#?

Regards, -- Ian MacDonald > -Original Message- > From: Michael J McGonagle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 6:55 AM > To: Ant Users List > Subject: Re: Ant for J#? > > > Darth Darknerd wrote: > > > > I don't want to be poli

Re: Ant for J#?

- Original Message - From: "Bevan Arps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Ant Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Ant Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 11:17 Subject: Re: Ant for J#? > > Currently Ant is a

Re: Ant for J#?

"Hunt, Bryan" wrote: > > If you think that ant should support J# your missing the point. If microsoft > > want to create disruptive technologies it should be at their expense that > support tools be developed. I am sorry that you took my post as supportive of Microshod, but you got me complete

Re: Ant for J#?

At 23:10 7/01/2002 -0800, Darth Darknerd wrote: >Also, I fail >to see the point to support a language that will forever only run >on one environment: Windows. The entire world doesn't revolve around Java - and there are many users of Ant (myself included) who use it very successfully for buildi

RE: Ant for J#?

To: Ant Users List Subject: Re: Ant for J#? Darth Darknerd wrote: > > I don't want to be political, but what's the point on working on > abortive standards. It is cumbersome technically to support > alternative java-like languages, and this may take away momentum > for

Re: Ant for J#?

Darth Darknerd wrote: > > I don't want to be political, but what's the point on working on > abortive standards. It is cumbersome technically to support > alternative java-like languages, and this may take away momentum > for existing java support and future developments. Also, I fail > to see

RE: Ant for J#?

Hi Joaquin, >I don't want to be political, but what's the point on working on >abortive standards. It is cumbersome technically to support >alternative java-like languages, and this may take away momentum >for existing java support and future developments. Also, I fail >to see the point to supp

Re: Ant for J#?

I don't want to be political, but what's the point on working on abortive standards. It is cumbersome technically to support alternative java-like languages, and this may take away momentum for existing java support and future developments. Also, I fail to see the point to support a language tha

Re: Ant for J#?

- Original Message - From: "Stefan Bodewig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 23:38 Subject: Re: Ant for J#? > On Sat, 5 Jan 2002, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Thinking about it, exten

Re: Ant for J#?

On Sat, 5 Jan 2002, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thinking about it, extending javac wont work. javac assumes that > your tool maps from .java to .class in a package heirarchy; and the > .net tools build an assembly (exe or dll) without any intermediate > steps (which actually makes

Re: Ant for J#?

On Sat, 5 Jan 2002, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > An interesting issue crops up w.r.t Ant: if anyone does try running > it on J# and it doesnt work, should we care? We take on fixes to run > on that Kawa (?) JVM, but I dont see that J# merits the same > attention. I think you mean

Re: Ant for J#?

On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Joseph S. Barrera, III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is anyone out there using Ant to compile java with Microsoft's J#? > > I can see three possible approaches: > 1. Extend the javac task to understand jc.exe (the J# compiler) > 2. Use an existing compiler type recognized by j

Re: Ant for J#? (or any language)

At 10:37 AM 1/5/2002 -0800, Steve Loughran wrote: >Thinking about it, extending javac wont work. javac assumes that your tool >maps from .java to .class in a package heirarchy; and the .net tools build >an assembly (exe or dll) without any intermediate steps (which actually >makes incremental buil

Re: Ant for J#?

"Henning P. Schmiedehausen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message a17163$u29$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:a17163$u29$[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > If you don't want to read such words, please use a Killfile. > X-Copyright: (C) 1996-2002 Henning Schmiedehausen > X-No-Archive: yes > X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5

Re: Ant for J#?

If you don't want to read such words, please use a Killfile. X-Copyright: (C) 1996-2002 Henning Schmiedehausen X-No-Archive: yes X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.1 (NOV) "Jon Skeet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > C# and J# are different things. J# is an IDE(?)/compiler for Java > (v1.1 only? Think so

RE: Ant for J#?

> From: Steve Loughran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Thinking about it, extending javac wont work. javac assumes > that your tool maps from .java to .class in a package > hierarchy; and the .net tools build an assembly (exe or dll) > without any intermediate steps (which actually makes > increme

Re: Ant for J#?

From: "Steve Cohen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Ant Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2002 05:52 Subject: RE: Ant for J#? I'm with you. Approach 4. To me Approach 1 is a non-starter. There is no reason to compromise either the efficien

RE: Ant for J#?

t the maintainers of the project to maintain this for them, especially when the whole purpose of J#, as far as I can see, is to wean developers away from java. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Fri 1/4/2002 4:10 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: RE: Ant

RE: Ant for J#?

> (Isn't it C#?) > > How about #4 - avoid J#(C#) and stick to Java to avoid lessening of > Java development momentum? C# and J# are different things. J# is an IDE(?)/compiler for Java (v1.1 only? Think so) to the bytecode format that .Net uses. It's meant to be a migration path for Java pro

RE: Ant for J#?

(Isn't it C#?) How about #4 - avoid J#(C#) and stick to Java to avoid lessening of Java development momentum? > -Original Message- > From: joe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 4:07 PM > To: ant-user > Cc: joe; joebar; cmaeda > Subject: Ant for J#? > > > Is

Re: Ant for J#?

eve - Original Message - From: "Joseph S. Barrera III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Ant Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 15:09 Subject: Re: Ant for J#? > > From: "DONNIE HALE" <[EMAIL PRO

Re: Ant for J#?

> From: "DONNIE HALE" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > A question I've been wondering about this is which library API will J# use - > the one from the MS CLR, or one that precisely matches the Java library API? > It'll be useless to try to have an implementation which only matches the language > syntax but

Re: Ant for J#?

A question I've been wondering about this is which library API will J# use - the one from the MS CLR, or one that precisely matches the Java library API? It'll be useless to try to have an implementation which only matches the language syntax but which requires completely different library call

Re: Ant for J#?

> From: "Steve Cohen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > What the heck is J#? > I'd heard of C# which was Microsoft's attempt to make a java-like > language that wasn't java. > But what is J#? An attempt to make a java-like language that IS java? > Wasn't there just a lawsuit about this? Sigh. I was hoping

RE: Ant for J#?

What the heck is J#? I'd heard of C# which was Microsoft's attempt to make a java-like language that wasn't java. But what is J#? An attempt to make a java-like language that IS java? Wasn't there just a lawsuit about this? -Original Message- From: Joseph S. Barrera III [mailto:[EMAIL PR