From: "." <quixoticsycophant@...>
Date: 2008-09-10T08:13:36+09:00
Subject: Re: Drake: Distributed Rake

On Sep 9, 6:52 pm, Martin DeMello <martindeme...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 3:38 PM, . <quixoticsycoph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Do we want
>
> >    task :a => :x
> >    task :a => :y
> >    task :a => :z
>
> > to be equivalent to
>
> >    task :a => :z
> >    task :a => :x
> >    task :a => :y
>
> > Yes or no?  If a programmer wants them to mean different things, how
> > shall we accommodate him?
>
> Yes! If you want it differently, you write in the ordering explicitly
>
> task :a => :z
> task :z => :y
> task :y => :x
>
> You have no reason to expect one operation to come before another if
> there is not an explicit dependency chain between them
>
> martin

Yes, however my point was that if we agree this

    task :a => :x
    task :a => :y
    task :a => :z

should be equivalent to this

    task :a => :z
    task :a => :x
    task :a => :y

(and I should hope we all agree), then there is nothing which can save
us.  We are forced to write our Rakefiles correctly.  No backwards
compatibility mode is possible for threads>1.

JL