Re: More on Actions, routes and builders in general

Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:

> > You say all three primary actions defer the work to a "compile_dmd"
> > action.  Then isn't it so that each action can accept the work and defer
> > it to "compile_dmd"?  Where does this go wrong?
> 
> Ah, my description of the problem were somewhat wrong. There is only 1 
> compile_dmd action that can output all three types of object. But there
> are three primary compile actions in d.aap. These support only one 
> output type each (because they add the correct buildaction attribute). 
> But when the outtypes are checked, it looks at the compile_dmd, and thus 
> it isn't able to distinguish between the primary actions.

OK, now I understand the situation.

When the primary action defers the work to another action, this
currently has the effect that the primary action supports the input and
output types of the action that the work is deferred to.  In the
situation you mention this shouldn't happen, the action doesn't really
support more output types.

The simplest solution is to define these actions in the old way, with
":action".

I don't know if any of the other extra features of using
define_action() is desired.  If that is so, then defining
get_out_types() yourself would work.

-- 
hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict:
216. Your pet rock leaves home.

 /// Bram Moolenaar -- [email protected] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net   \\\
///        Sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
\\\              Project leader for A-A-P -- http://www.A-A-P.org        ///
 \\\  Buy at Amazon and help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF.nl/click1.html ///


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by The 2004 JavaOne(SM) Conference
Learn from the experts at JavaOne(SM), Sun's Worldwide Java Developer
Conference, June 28 - July 1 at the Moscone Center in San Francisco, CA
REGISTER AND SAVE! http://java.sun.com/javaone/sf Priority Code NWMGYKND