Mailing-List: contact ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001220172448.00b4c320@latcs2.cs.latrobe.edu.au>
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 17:24:48 +1100
To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
From: Peter Donald <donaldp@apache.org>
Subject: RE: Did somebody say Shut up and Write? :)
Cc: <ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <NDBBKHNOELDNJFCHKAHIGELOCBAA.jsd2000@bellatlantic.net>
References: <B66577D0.D3E0%duncan@x180.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 12:30  20/12/00 -0500, Joshua Davis wrote:
>> As interesting as it is to view the world as a tree of single type nodes,
>> when you get into using things for long its inevitable that some sort of
>> specialization creeps in somewhere. And its actually quite useful
>> at times.
>> Genericity is not necessarily your friend. Yes, this is a biased
>> opinion --
>> it's based on 3 1/2 years of coding Java at JavaSoft though if that means
>> anything.
>>
>
>Genericity leads to the "trying to boil the ocean" problem.  ANT is very
>vulnerable to this.  I would hate to see it devolve into some sort of wierdo
>XML scripting language.

Don't be ludicrous. Genericity does not neccesarily lead to flexability
syndrome (your "trying to boil the ocean"). Just like specificity does not
lead to a rigid jail. Done well genericity works, done poorly it doesn't.
Specificty is easier to do but it's not like we lack brain power on ant-dev
so ...

Cheers,

Pete

*-----------------------------------------------------*
| "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, |
| and proving that there is no need to do so - almost |
| everyone gets busy on the proof."                   |
|              - John Kenneth Galbraith               |
*-----------------------------------------------------*