Is exec a good programming solution to ant OutOfMemory issues?

This question requires a bit of backstory... At my company, we produce a set of PDF and HTML files. A very large set. The current build process (which I designe开发者_如何学编程d, in haste) is a Perl script that reads a set of files, where each file contains a new ant command to execute.

It is designed terribly.

Now, I'm trying to shift the entire project over to using ant for the majority of the tasks. Within a target, I can construct a list of files that need to be built, as either PDF or HTML. However, when I call the ant command to build each file, after about three builds (of, say, five), the entire process crashes with an OutOfMemory error. Furthermore, my buildlog.xml ends up being something like 20 megs--it concatenates every ant command's output into one giant log, since they are being called from a single target. With the earlier Perl solution, I was able to get a buildlog.xml for each ant command--simply save and rename the buildlog to something else.

Even if I set ant or java heap sizes in my user.properties, I still fail with an OOM eventually. I wonder if an appropriate solution is to call <exec> to launch a script that does some of what I described and desire: namely, call ant, rename the buildlog, and die--theoretically allocating and freeing up space better than one "giant" ant call. I am worried that I am going to be heading down another "hacky" solution to a problem that's well-defined, and can be entirely confined to ant. Then again, <exec> does exist for a reason, so should I not feel bad for using it?

---

As with most corporate software (at least those which have deadlines and, if yours don't, please let me know where you work so I can try get a job there), the first step is to get it working.

Then, worry about getting it working well.

For that first step, you can use any tool at your disposal, no matter how ugly you think it looks.

But you might want to make sure that the powers-that-be know that you've had to do all sorts of kludgy things to get it working for them, so that they allow you to hopefully fix it up before maintenance has to start on it. You probably don't want to be maintaining a hideously ugly code base or design.

We've unleashed such wonders on the world as applications that shut themselves down nightly to avoid memory leaks (leaving the OS to restart them), putting "questionable" code at the other end of a TCP socket so their crashing doesn't bring down the main application and, I'm sure, many other horrors that my brain has decided to remove all trace of.