Gerry Shaw:
>I do understand the slipperly slope of this but what I'm trying to do is
>make writing complicated tasks feasible.

In my mind the good design of a powerful tool makes it easy to do common
things, and possible to do things however the user wants -- including
things the designer may not have thought of.

Regarding the slippery slope question: Its an equally valid argument for
NAnt to put up signs indicating the slope exists as it is to argue that no
slopes should be created.

IOW, if the feature makes some things easier (esp. things you want to do
with the tool) then add it, and in the documentation, place them in an
"Advanced Techniques" section with a disclaimer of their potential for
abuse.

>Maybe we can find a better solution?

It seems to me that there is nothing inherently right or wrong about
functions in themselves, but rather how closely they fit with the design
goals for NAnt. To get at what I mean by this, I included two links that
explain it better than I can:

http://www.paulgraham.com/design.html

and section three here:
http://www.paulgraham.com/arcll1.html

In short, when answering whether a feature is "safe" or "easily
misunderstood", one must first ask, who is this tool for? Are you building
the tool that you want to use? Are you building the tool so that it
protects everyone (including yourself) from misuse? Are you building this
tool for experts to use effectively? Primarily Novices? etc.


Best,
Bill

William E. Caputo
ThoughtWorks, Inc.





-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Nant-developers mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-developers

Reply via email to