At 11:53 AM 6/7/01 -0700, Diane Holt wrote: >--- Peter Donald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Iteration and selection should really only be used in >> rule/template/generic targets and thus only used by experienced people. >> Including these features in the core would however mean novices would >> use them ... probably in bad ways ;) Worse we would have to support and >> explain to them, "no don't use if ask there, use multiple targes with if >> attribute, don't use repetition here, explicitly list the data etc". > >I have to disagree with this. I don't think what functionality Ant offers >should be determined by whether it might be used "in bad ways". I've >cleaned up plenty of cruddy code -- C, shell-scripts (all the variants), >make (all the variants), jam, you name it -- and never once did it make me >think, "Yuck! -- 'X' must really be a crappy tool, it's being used so >badly." I just think, "Man, whoever wrote this sure didn't know what the >hell they were doing."
possibly. I have had the opposite experience. One reason I use java is because I got fed up with crappy code produced by C++ developers (Same with python vs perl). Sure - these languages when used well, are easy to read, easy-ish to use etc. However it is rare that people have the skill to do this properly. >> By separating repetition and selection into another layer (ie >> templating), it saves us mountains of hassle and ensures that people >> using it will have a clue (or at least to some degree). > >I just don't see that -- if it's being offered, whether inside or out, >it's still connected, officially, to Ant, and you're right back where you >say you don't want to have to be (supporting and documenting it). true - but it is supporting a more advanced build developer which is infinitly easier. That said I always planned to add an if task to ant (though host it elsewhere), so ... Cheers, Pete *-----------------------------------------------------* | "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, | | and proving that there is no need to do so - almost | | everyone gets busy on the proof." | | - John Kenneth Galbraith | *-----------------------------------------------------*
