On Sat, 2004-01-10 at 07:36, Stephen Colebourne wrote: > From: "Jason van Zyl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > It's all good on paper, but beanshell 2.0 in my mind is the option I'm > > leaning toward right now simply because it's gone though an iteration or > > two. But who knows in time. At this point in time I'm not jumping in > > head first into Groovy.
> I can understand the reluctance about Groovy both on a technical and > personality level. I haven't used either, yet Groovy has the greatest > mindshare for me. But why do you think that is? Things like Beanshell and OGNL just work. I have never had a single problem with OGNL which is simply just awesome for dealing with expressions. And I've rarely had any problems with Beanshell. There aren't many blog entries about either. Groovy may eventually be good if it outlasts the hype. The ideas behind Groovy are awesome, I'll wait to see if the implementation is equally so. > This is a decision not to be taken lightly, as maven can't > afford to get it wrong a second time! Well, I'm not too worried about it. Right now I'll take the tool where it's not a crap shoot what comes out the other end. I've spent an ungodly number of hours trying to figure out why Jelly contexts that seem to have popped into existence with no ryhme or reason, why some classloading mechanism is used, and simply been baffled at what comes out of Jexl. These things just don't happen with Beanshell and OGNL. > Stephen > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- jvz. Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://maven.apache.org happiness is like a butterfly: the more you chase it, the more it will elude you, but if you turn your attention to other things, it will come and sit softly on your shoulder ... -- Thoreau --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
