How about this stuff?
> I think that XML-based communication between tasks and the
> trycatch task have different purposes. Specifically,
> trycatch is a flow control device. Flow control can
> certainly be reproduced with increased task verbosity, but
> using a flow control device to descri
Hi,
* Troy Laurin wrote on 13.07.2004 (09:24):
> Sascha Andres wrote:
Added above line. Deleted too much, and don't wanted to use
undo after I wrote all of the text ;)
> > can be accessed from all tasks. The last function adds a protected
> > object to the store only readable from a task of the
Comments inline...
-T
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Sascha Andres
>
> When I think a bit more of sharing information throughout tasks I come
> to these points:
>
> In a programming language, data can be:
>
> * private
> * pu
s it is time to summarize :-).
+1 for the (or )
Cheers,
Clayton
> -Original Message-
> From: Gert Driesen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: July 8, 2004 11:05 PM
> To: Troy Laurin; Nant-Developers (E-Mail)
> Subject: Re: [nant-dev] trycatch task ?
>
>
> Troy,
&
Hi,
* Martin Aliger wrote on 09.07.2004 (13:43):
> to pass information from one task to other. Since speed is not main interest
> in automated builds (sorry Matt - I still appreciate your optimization
> work!) XML should be straightforward solution. But I never think we will
> serialize XML on ever
Hi again,
> > Some time ago I propose XML-like based communication - maybe its time
comes?
> > How do you see it now when there was enough time to consider it?
>
> I don't like the we-do-anything-in-xml approach. XML is a
> nice thing, but it certainly adds some overhead to
> communications. I wou
Hi,
* Martin Aliger wrote on 09.07.2004 (08:40):
> I think both are cases of inter-task communication. IMO current nant is
> totally missing such communication. errorproperty proposal is very limited
> implementation of such communication. I'd rather prefer making something
> more robust enabling m
hare?
Regards,
-- Troy
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Aliger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, 9 July 2004 2:40 PM
> To: Gert Driesen; Troy Laurin; Nant-Developers (E-Mail)
> Subject: Re: [nant-dev] trycatch task ?
>
> I think both are cases of inter-task c
y, leading to larger build files.
-T
> -Original Message-
> From: Gert Driesen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, 9 July 2004 2:05 PM
> To: Troy Laurin; Nant-Developers (E-Mail)
> Subject: Re: [nant-dev] trycatch task ?
>
> Troy,
>
> I think we first n
l)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, July 09, 2004 8:04 AM
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] trycatch task ?
> Troy,
>
> I think we first need to come to an agreement on whether its a good idea
to
> add a try-catch task, or whether to go for the errorproperty
implementation.
&g
riginal Message -
From: "Troy Laurin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Nant-Developers (E-Mail)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, July 09, 2004 4:06 AM
Subject: RE: [nant-dev] trycatch task ?
I'm not sure about a try-catch task, but I found that a try-finally task
(atta
I'm not sure about a try-catch task, but I found that a try-finally task
(attached... the implementation is the obvious one, which seems to work)
greatly improved the apparent intent of my build file for a
clearcase-export target (Needed only because clearcase doesn't actually
support the idea of
12 matches
Mail list logo
