Huxi LI wrote:
Very interesting dicussion in this thread. And it seems most people are in
favor
of using namespace as a single mechanism. It is true that using
namespace is
the
most simple way to resolve conflict, but I insist that it is not the most
transparent
solution for users. That is because, IMHO, uniform acess principal is
important in many case,
using antlib destroy such beauty. As a simple example, when ant is
integrated
in Groovy using the AntBuilder, we can seamlessly invoke any Ant tasks and
datatypes by
using simple method call such as:
ant.echo("Hello World")
But using namespace destroys such uniform access principal provided by the
core project comonents,
and so it destroy the seamless integration with groovy as well. Anyway,
thanks all for the active discussion.
HL
I agree, namespaces lack beauty. Indeed, they are ugly and painful to
work with. But once you have task/type autoload, you have naming
conflict. xmlns is the "official" way to isolate stuff from different
xml languages, and, despite its many failings, does work in build files.
The big penalty is now you have xmlns declarations which need to be
copied along with task declarations for cut-and-paste editing.
I dont know what we can do to make groovy's life easier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
