How would this be different from the java, groovy, bsh, jython, and other 
scripting languages supported right now by the service engine?

I'll tell you what's really cool about supporting all of these languages, and 
for work groups allowing people to use whatever they want: the end result 
requires an enormous skill set to maintain. Also, with less structured 
languages like java and groovy where you can do whatever you want (and people 
most certainly do, whether it is helpful or not for the functionality they are 
building), so the result is a lot of inconsistency and higher maintenance costs.

-David


On Feb 23, 2010, at 8:54 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:

> Hi Adrian:
> I think I already said what I'd like changed. Perhaps you overlooked this: 
> Please add a procedural language to the mix. PHP, Groovy, Bean Shell etc. I 
> don't care which.
> 
> Regards,
> Ruth
> 
> Adrian Crum wrote:
>> Maybe the next time you try to use it, you could create a list of things you 
>> would like to see changed and submit it to the community.
>> 
>> -Adrian
>> 
>> Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>> Hi Adrian:
>>> 
>>> To tell the truth, I don't use it to build my services anymore. Too much 
>>> trouble to try and figure out each time how it works. Much easier for me to 
>>> write Java code.
>>> 
>>> BTW, don't you find it curious that no other non-committers (aside from the 
>>> original inquiry) has anything to say about this?
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Ruth
>>> 
>>> Adrian Crum wrote:
>>>> Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>> I tried using the Mini Language to create some Simple Services and I 
>>>>> found that in each situation, CRUD operations were only the tip of the 
>>>>> ice-berg as far as developing applications was concerned. My applications 
>>>>> do much more than update database records. To go beyond CRUD (and simple 
>>>>> HTML forms to update the database) is very cumbersome using the Mini 
>>>>> Language.
>>>> 
>>>> If you give us examples of things that could be made easier in 
>>>> mini-language, then we might be able to change the language.
>>>> 
>>>> -Adrian
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 

Reply via email to