> I agree that if the names are saved in many places you have a mess.
Let me agree, too.
There is another reason why I never use PM to build standalone
scripts: Both for "open source" and "closed, non-public client-specific"
projects I use the same (open source) approach, even when the code
is not supposed to be revealed to someone other than my client.
Eliding comments, making the code unreadable by supressing empty
lines or indents, or having run-time diagnostics not refer to the
truly faulty script and line is always simply counter-productive
-- in either scenario. I don't have to play silly buggers with my
clients.
I *do* value the Package Manager for maintaining projects!
Project files neatly describe what belongs to a project. What is
part of the project code, what is just "additional material", and
how to run a test. It's just nice to have some kind of canonical
form for this kind of information. (Unix "Makefiles" play pretty
much the same role, BTW.) Like others, I have no trouble to maintain
J project manually, without the PM GUI.
"Standalone scripts" though: the sooner those die, the better. Go
ahead, Chris! They just cause an artificial layer if not barrier
between the users and the coders of some J code. (At least *I*
refuse to hunt down bugs in standalone scripts. I had to do this
when I did the J 4.x Unix ports. One of the reasons I decided to
stop that work.)
I feel the same is wrong with the JAL process. There is this, pardon
my words, STUPID chain having the J code in ...
... the J SVN repository or some checked out dir at some developer
... packaged form as created by the "build" process
... published packaged form created by revving up VERSION
... downloaded/installed/depackaged form at all those users.
All this ensures is a dichotomy between the scripts that are installed
and the scripts which are SVN-mainained. It's schizophrenic. For
developers, it's an additional burden to test whether the installed
variant really works; end-users running across some bug have litttle
motivation to download the source version of their code and putting
improvements at the right place.
Or am I awfully wrong and JAL authors do indeed receive a stream
of patches or even new features from users of their code? Please
let me know if the system *does* work.
Martin
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
