ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Rall <...@finemaltcoding.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] procedural versus purely declarative
Date Mon, 23 Apr 2001 23:58:55 GMT
Peter Donald <donaldp@apache.org> writes:

> At 10:12  23/4/01 -0700, Daniel Rall wrote:
> >Peter Donald <donaldp@apache.org> writes:
> >
> >> Can you give me a (good) use case where XSLT would not suffice?
> >
> >Complex string manipulation.
> 
> thats not a use case thats an feature of language - give me a use case in a
> build file.

Build stamp formatting.

> >> >Of course the point is simplicity of use. I am not sure we will gain that
> >> >with XSLT. We will need something taylored to ANTs needs.
> >> 
> >> Feel free to create a new language - xslt has the advantage of being
> >> standard and well known. Sure it is not very pretty or simple but every
> >> alternative is complex. If you have looked at any of the alternate systems
> >> that aren't just a morass of scripts (ie automake, imake, etc) they all
> >> have that complexity/power balance. 
> >
> >Velocity's markup is dirt-simple.
> 
> Velocity's markup is simpler - requirexs learning both of language and
> whats is in the context though. Also non-standard.

True, which is why I like your pluggable transformation system idea.

Daniel

Mime
View raw message