--- Peter Donald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > transformation). Consequently novice users hack it > up so badly and > incomprehensibly and I used to have to provide > support for such people ... > *shudder* ... hence I no like it anymore ;)
Ok, you just might make me change my argument. I don't mind other people digging their own holes - that is, like you, as long as I don't have to repeatedly support them. ;-) > True - but I am fairly sure that we already knew > that (at least to a > degree). Currently ant specifies a sequence of > operations. We add in > repetition (ie foreach) and selection (ie if) then > we have just invented an > XML programming language ;) Something that was a > declared non-goal of ant. Bingo! You nailed it on the nose but missed a critical point. Ant already IS a programming language. It's not a mainstream procedural language, but it is a language, with the express purpose of controlling build ops. And as we well know from experience with other languages, sequences of operations frequently need iteration and conditional execution. That is, unless you want to model the language after Prolog, etc. ;-) roger __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
