And yet so many products/projects use Jelly an XML based language if im not mistaken. Its a wonder why that ever took off but it did some time in the past.
2011/3/9 phil swenson <[email protected]> > I think xml for ant is ok for a simple build. Problem is if you are doing > anything of significance, your simple build starts needing conditionals, > variables, loops, and more complex constructs than procedures. > > Then you start hacking ant to do this (sorta) and it becomes a nightmare. > There is a reason we don't write our applications in XML. (As Casper says) > XML a terrible programming language. > > If anything XML hell is under-blown, because I keep seeing the same > horrible mistakes made everywhere I go. Unmaintainable, huge, > un-debuggable, un-grokable, crazy slow builds. People jumping through manual > hoops because automation via XML is too much of a PITA. Notice in the > Ruby/Python/Groovy world everyone has tons of automation. They have > auto-deployments to EC2, database migrations, tons of cool test/bdd > frameworks, dev/test/prod environment setup, dynamic configurations, etc. > They always are leading the way in automation. Yes, I know some of this > exists in the Java world, but it's usually done long after it's invented in > the dynamic lang world. > > 2011/3/7 Cédric Beust ♔ <[email protected]> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
