|
»
»
<isset> oddity
|
View:
New views
7 Messages
—
Rating Filter:
Alert me
|
 |
<isset> oddity
by Rebhan, Gilbert
::
Rate this Message:
Hi, found another oddity after upgrading to Ant 1.7.1, regarding the handling of properties and xmlproperties. <project name="bla" default="main" basedir="."> <!-- // Taskdefs --> <!-- Import AntContrib --> <taskdef resource="net/sf/antcontrib/antlib.xml" /> <!-- Taskdefs // --> <!-- // Properties --> <property file="props.txt" /> <xmlproperty file="props.xml" keeproot="false" /> <!-- Properties // --> <target name="main"> <echo>${ant.version}</echo> <echo>$${xmlkey} == ${xmlkey}</echo> <echo>$${txtkey} == ${txtkey}</echo> <if> <isset property="xmlkey"/> <then> <echo>xmlkey set and != null</echo> </then> <else> <echo>xmlkey not set</echo> </else> </if> <if> <isset property="txtkey" /> <then> <echo>txtkey set and != null</echo> </then> <else> <echo>txtkey not set</echo> </else> </if> </target Testpropertyfiles both xmlkey and txtkey are null <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <root> <xmlkey></xmlkey> <xmlfoo>bar</xmlfoo> </root> ------ txtfoo=bar txtkey= ant 1.6.5 [echo] Apache Ant version 1.6.5 compiled on June 2 2005 [echo] ${xmlkey} == ${xmlkey} [echo] ${txtkey} == [echo] xmlkey not set [echo] txtkey set and != null means txt and xmlproperty behave different seems to be fixed now, as ant 1.7.1 gives the same result for txt and xmlproperty = ant 1.7.1 [echo] Apache Ant version 1.7.1 compiled on June 27 2008 [echo] ${xmlkey} == [echo] ${txtkey} == [echo] xmlkey set and != null [echo] txtkey set and != null Testpropertyfiles both xmlkey and txtkey are " " <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <root> <xmlkey> </xmlkey> <xmlfoo>bar</xmlfoo> </root> ------ txtfoo=bar txtkey= *blank* ant 1.6.5 [echo] Apache Ant version 1.7.1 compiled on June 27 2008 [echo] ${xmlkey} == ${xmlkey} [echo] ${txtkey} == [echo] xmlkey not set [echo] txtkey set and != null ant 1.7.1 [echo] Apache Ant version 1.7.1 compiled on June 27 2008 [echo] ${xmlkey} == ${xmlkey} [echo] ${txtkey} == [echo] xmlkey not set [echo] txtkey set and != null means there's a difference between the handling of txtproperties and xmlproperties that existed in 1.6.5 and still exists in 1.7.1, should be the same for both kind of properties, i would expect = [echo] ${xmlkey} == [echo] ${txtkey} == Is that intended behaviour or just a bug ? Regards, Gilbert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@... For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@... |
|
|
RE: <isset> oddity
by Rebhan, Gilbert
::
Rate this Message:
followup = the behaviour described in my first posting occurs with Windows2000, jdk 1.5.0_11 i checked with the same propertyfiles, means <xmlkey> </xmlkey> txtkey= *blank* and antscript with isset condition on my private machine = OpenSuse 11.1/64bit, jdk 1.6.0_13 and got equal ouput for all available ant versions = [echo] Apache Ant version 1.6.5 compiled on June 2 2005 [echo] ${xmlkey} == ${xmlkey} [echo] ${txtkey} == ${txtkey} [echo] xmlkey not set [echo] txtkey not set [echo] Apache Ant version 1.7.0 compiled on December 13 2006 [echo] ${xmlkey} == ${xmlkey} [echo] ${txtkey} == ${txtkey} [echo] xmlkey not set [echo] txtkey not set [echo] Apache Ant version 1.7.1 compiled on June 27 2008 [echo] ${xmlkey} == ${xmlkey} [echo] ${txtkey} == ${txtkey} [echo] xmlkey not set [echo] txtkey not set i rechecked on Windows2000, jdk1.5.0_11 [echo] Apache Ant version 1.6.5 compiled on June 2 2005 [echo] ${xmlkey} == ${xmlkey} [echo] ${txtkey} == [echo] xmlkey not set [echo] txtkey set and != null [echo] Apache Ant version 1.7.0 compiled on December 13 2006 [echo] ${xmlkey} == ${xmlkey} [echo] ${txtkey} == [echo] xmlkey not set [echo] txtkey set and != null [echo] Apache Ant version 1.7.1 compiled on June 27 2008 [echo] ${xmlkey} == ${xmlkey} [echo] ${txtkey} == [echo] xmlkey not set [echo] txtkey set and != null and AIX 5.3.0.0, J2RE 1.5.0 IBM J9 2.3 AIX ppc-32 [echo] Apache Ant version 1.7.1 compiled on June 27 2008 [echo] ${xmlkey} == ${xmlkey} [echo] ${txtkey} == [echo] xmlkey not set [echo] txtkey set and != null Conclusion = there seems to be a difference related to the handling of txt- and xmlproperties on different platforms, maybe it's caused by jdk/jre ? So i need to use a workaround like that, to check whether a property isset or is blank = <if> <!--<isset property="xmlkey"/>--> <not> <or> <contains string="${xmlkey}" substring="$${"/> <equals arg1="${xmlkey}" arg2="" /> </or> </not> <then> <echo>xmlkey set and != null</echo> </then> <else> <echo>xmlkey not set</echo> </else> </if> Any other ideas ? Should i open a bugreport ? Regards, Gilbert -----Original Message----- From: Rebhan, Gilbert Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 4:15 PM To: 'Ant Users List' Subject: <isset> oddity Hi, found another oddity after upgrading to Ant 1.7.1, regarding the handling of properties and xmlproperties. <project name="bla" default="main" basedir="."> <!-- // Taskdefs --> <!-- Import AntContrib --> <taskdef resource="net/sf/antcontrib/antlib.xml" /> <!-- Taskdefs // --> <!-- // Properties --> <property file="props.txt" /> <xmlproperty file="props.xml" keeproot="false" /> <!-- Properties // --> <target name="main"> <echo>${ant.version}</echo> <echo>$${xmlkey} == ${xmlkey}</echo> <echo>$${txtkey} == ${txtkey}</echo> <if> <isset property="xmlkey"/> <then> <echo>xmlkey set and != null</echo> </then> <else> <echo>xmlkey not set</echo> </else> </if> <if> <isset property="txtkey" /> <then> <echo>txtkey set and != null</echo> </then> <else> <echo>txtkey not set</echo> </else> </if> </target Testpropertyfiles both xmlkey and txtkey are null <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <root> <xmlkey></xmlkey> <xmlfoo>bar</xmlfoo> </root> ------ txtfoo=bar txtkey= ant 1.6.5 [echo] Apache Ant version 1.6.5 compiled on June 2 2005 [echo] ${xmlkey} == ${xmlkey} [echo] ${txtkey} == [echo] xmlkey not set [echo] txtkey set and != null means txt and xmlproperty behave different seems to be fixed now, as ant 1.7.1 gives the same result for txt and xmlproperty = ant 1.7.1 [echo] Apache Ant version 1.7.1 compiled on June 27 2008 [echo] ${xmlkey} == [echo] ${txtkey} == [echo] xmlkey set and != null [echo] txtkey set and != null Testpropertyfiles both xmlkey and txtkey are " " <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <root> <xmlkey> </xmlkey> <xmlfoo>bar</xmlfoo> </root> ------ txtfoo=bar txtkey= *blank* ant 1.6.5 [echo] Apache Ant version 1.7.1 compiled on June 27 2008 [echo] ${xmlkey} == ${xmlkey} [echo] ${txtkey} == [echo] xmlkey not set [echo] txtkey set and != null ant 1.7.1 [echo] Apache Ant version 1.7.1 compiled on June 27 2008 [echo] ${xmlkey} == ${xmlkey} [echo] ${txtkey} == [echo] xmlkey not set [echo] txtkey set and != null means there's a difference between the handling of txtproperties and xmlproperties that existed in 1.6.5 and still exists in 1.7.1, should be the same for both kind of properties, i would expect = [echo] ${xmlkey} == [echo] ${txtkey} == Is that intended behaviour or just a bug ? Regards, Gilbert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@... For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@... --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@... For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@... |
|
|
Re: <isset> oddity
by Stefan Bodewig
::
Rate this Message:
On 2009-06-16, Rebhan, Gilbert <Gilbert.Rebhan@...> wrote:
> Conclusion = there seems to be a difference related to the handling > of txt- and xmlproperties on different platforms, maybe it's caused > by jdk/jre ? Looked like a Java5/Java6 difference, maybe inside the XML parser. > Should i open a bugreport ? Yes, please do (so I can "untick" yur emails ;-) Stefan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@... For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@... |
|
|
RE: <isset> oddity
by Rebhan, Gilbert
::
Rate this Message:
-----Original Message----- From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@...] Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 9:49 AM To: user@... Subject: Re: <isset> oddity /* On 2009-06-16, Rebhan, Gilbert <Gilbert.Rebhan@...> wrote: > Conclusion = there seems to be a difference related to the handling > of txt- and xmlproperties on different platforms, maybe it's caused > by jdk/jre ? Looked like a Java5/Java6 difference, maybe inside the XML parser. > Should i open a bugreport ? Yes, please do (so I can "untick" yur emails ;-) */ Bugreport opened, Patch attached = https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47381 It wasn't an issue with jdk, but the processNode Method in XmlProperty = if (nodeText.trim().length() != 0 || emptyNode) { addProperty(prefix, nodeText, id); } when trim removes all white spaces, so it works with = if (nodeText.trim().length() >= 0 || emptyNode) { addProperty(prefix, nodeText, id); } Works with ant 1.7.1, jdk 1.5.0_11 and jdk 1.6.0_07 on Windows 2000 Have to recheck on my machine later .. Regards, Gilbert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@... For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@... |
|
|
RE: <isset> oddity
by Rebhan, Gilbert
::
Rate this Message:
-----Original Message----- From: Rebhan, Gilbert Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 1:58 PM To: 'Ant Users List' Subject: RE: <isset> oddity /* Bugreport opened, Patch attached = https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47381 [...] Works with ant 1.7.1, jdk 1.5.0_11 and jdk 1.6.0_07 on Windows 2000 Have to recheck on my machine later .. */ .. and also with J2RE 1.5.0 IBM J9 2.3 AIX ppc-32 on AIX 5.3.0.0 Regards, Gilbert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@... For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@... |
|
|
Re: <isset> oddity
by Stefan Bodewig
::
Rate this Message:
On 2009-06-17, Rebhan, Gilbert <Gilbert.Rebhan@...> wrote:
> It wasn't an issue with jdk, but the processNode Method in XmlProperty > if (nodeText.trim().length() != 0 || emptyNode) { > addProperty(prefix, nodeText, id); > } > when trim removes all white spaces, so it works with > if (nodeText.trim().length() >= 0 || emptyNode) { > addProperty(prefix, nodeText, id); > } > Works with ant 1.7.1, jdk 1.5.0_11 and jdk 1.6.0_07 on Windows 2000 > Have to recheck on my machine later .. I guess this is for convenience so that <foo></foo> and <foo/> mean the same thing as <foo> </foo> (it's not that likely that people actually want a value of newline). Maybe we need some sort of flag? Stefan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@... For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@... |
|
|
Re: <isset> oddity
by Gilbert Rebhan
::
Rate this Message:
Stefan Bodewig schrieb:
> On 2009-06-17, Rebhan, Gilbert wrote: > >> It wasn't an issue with jdk, but the processNode Method in XmlProperty > >> if (nodeText.trim().length() != 0 || emptyNode) { >> addProperty(prefix, nodeText, id); >> } > >> when trim removes all white spaces, so it works with > >> if (nodeText.trim().length() >= 0 || emptyNode) { >> addProperty(prefix, nodeText, id); >> } > >> Works with ant 1.7.1, jdk 1.5.0_11 and jdk 1.6.0_07 on Windows 2000 >> Have to recheck on my machine later .. > > I guess this is for convenience so that > > <foo></foo> > > and > > <foo/> > > mean the same thing as > > <foo> > </foo> > > (it's not that likely that people actually want a value of newline). > > Maybe we need some sort of flag? hmm, i just checked on my private machine - OpenSUSE 11.1/64bit with jdk 1.5.0_18 and jdk 1.6.0_13 and the same propertyfiles, means <xmlkey> <xmlkey/> and txtkey=*blank* but the patch has no impact, still the same output !? Using a " " property may not be of practical importance, but the behaviour should be the same for txtproperty and xmlproperty, it is, but diametrical = on my LinuxBox (jdk 5 +6, the same behavior already with ant 1.6.5) [echo] ${xmlkey} == ${xmlkey} [echo] ${txtkey} == ${txtkey} [echo] xmlkey not set [echo] txtkey not set and on Windows and AIX (jdk 5 + 6) [echo] ${xmlkey} == [echo] ${txtkey} == [echo] xmlkey set [echo] txtkey set maybe a 32bit <> 64bit issue ? Right now i have no 32bit Linux around to check .. Can someone confirm my investigations ? Regards, Gilbert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@... For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@... |
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |
