Mailing-List: contact ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20010425110757.010838e0@mail.alphalink.com.au>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:07:57 +1000
To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
From: Peter Donald <donaldp@apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] procedural versus purely declarative
Cc: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <m3snizrww0.fsf@despot.finemaltcoding.com>
References: <3.0.6.32.20010424083109.010b3980@mail.alphalink.com.au>
 <3.0.6.32.20010424020746.00eab770@mail.alphalink.com.au>
 <3.0.6.32.20010423111650.00d27b10@mail.alphalink.com.au>
 <3.0.6.32.20010424020746.00eab770@mail.alphalink.com.au>
 <3.0.6.32.20010424083109.010b3980@mail.alphalink.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 04:58  23/4/01 -0700, Daniel Rall wrote:
>> 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.

We have a task to do that ;) Historically anything that reached a certain
complexity threshold was recomended to be placed in a task (or use BSF
script module). We used to push that all the time - less so now. 
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               |
*-----------------------------------------------------*