Antform is available on sourceforge. I use it to provide a form for users to
select options during the compile or to get the username and password for the
CM system.
<target name="__get_svn_user">
<!--
#######################################################################################################################################
TARGET: __get_svn_user
Purpose: This target uses an antform to obtain the user's ID and password for
accessing subversion.
See: __init_diff, __validate_release, __retrieve_svn_info,
__retrieve_svn_update, __get_svn_target_url
#######################################################################################################################################
-->
<antform title="SVN properties">
<label>SVN login</label>
<textProperty label="User Name: " property="svnuser" required="true"
focus="true"/>
<textProperty label="Password: " property="svnpass" password="true"
required="true"/>
</antform>
</target>
This puts a form up for user input. The problem would be that if the parallel
tasking redirects output (Unix equivalent of stdout) the user would not see the
form.
Klaus Malorny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Chuck Holzwarth wrote:
> Perhaps the facility that spawns the targets could manage the screen/buffer
> output. This would mean that some facility would have to exist similar to
> named pipes in Unix. This way, console output would be directed from the
> buffer (or pipe) that had first output while other targets would be producing
> output that could be buffered or spooled to disk (high volume of output) for
> later display. A GUI that would be integrated would possibly have access to
> the streams in a windowed type display but the end result should probably
> display the console format even if views of the running thread outputs are
> allowed.
>
Yes, large output would have to be paged to disk.
Basically, a GUI can easily insert the respective output in the output window
where the target started, thus keeping the output in one block. A console
output
could do the same _if_ it would support something like "curses" and implement
something like a "more" or "less" frontend. But likely nobody wants to
integrate
such a rather old-fashioned technology.
Thinking a little bit more about the issue, I was wondering whether it would be
a good idea to integrate the target-level parallelism (as discussed here) and
the task-level parallelism (i.e.
task) into one beast, as such issues
like output handling and maximum number of threads executed in parallel could
benefit from it.
> How would antform be handled?
>
Never heard of it before, but googling for it, such a task would simply have to
queue up the requests and prompt them to the user one after another.
Klaus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thank you,
Chuck Holzwarth
(804) 403-3478 (home)
(540) 335-3171 (cell)
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
