ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Smiley <>
Subject Re: "available" shouldn't actually load the class; just see if it's resolvable
Date Tue, 09 Nov 2004 20:50:07 GMT
Peter Reilly wrote:
> David Smiley wrote:
>> Does anyone want to offer their opinion?  It should be an easy change 
>> and I think it would be very unlikely if this broke any existing builds.
> It will break some builds.
> Using the current method, the script knows that the class is present and 
> useable, and so it can be used later in the build.
> Peter

I believe the primary use of "available" is to conditionally compile 
code against.  The class's follow-on dependancies don't need to be 
present for this common use-case.  My suggestion here is only a problem 
if (a) you really do want to load the class because you need to execute 
code spawned from ant, and (b) the follow-on dependancies if any are not 

I'd also like to recommend that ant explain what follow-on class is 
preventing "available" from succeeding without having to enable ant's 
debug mode.

Dominique wrote:
> I think it's a reasonable request, but to keep the former behavior
> as-is, I'd simply add an initialize="true|false" attribute, to mirror's
> Java's Class#forName overload. The attribute would default to true, and
> you'd be able to set it explicitly to false. --DD

I suggest the name "load" instead since that is the java vernacular for 
what's happening.

I also suggest that the next snapshot implementing this have it default 
to "false" and we'll get a feel for wether this is a problem at that time.

~ David Smiley

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message