On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 1:19 AM, Ittay Dror <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The root of this is, I think, because while dealing with all this build > logic, both frameworks refused to embrace the principals behind OOP. Both > obviously need a backing language to actually do things and have chosen > Java, but the front end is not OO.
Interesting thoughts Ittay. What you write meshes with JavaScript-based dream-Ant code posted a few weeks ago by one of the commiters (from SUN I believe), to which Stefan answered with LISP code I think ;-) All this to say that you are not alone these lines. But while I agree that having a true scripting language for Ant would help (OO, prototype-based, or functional, leaning towards the latter for Ant myself), I think it's important to remember than good builds are *declarative* in nature. Using a pure language, when most have little or no support to declare your intent, would make scripts unreadable. Lots of people argue, for good reasons too, that large Ant scripts are already unreadable, but my point is that being *declarative* is essential to builds in general and Ant in particular. And I'll just stop at that ;-) --DD --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
