ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicolas Mailhot <>
Subject Re: Ant: pros and cons!
Date Tue, 20 Jul 2004 10:17:02 GMT
On mar, 2004-07-20 at 09:56 +0200, Johan Vromans CPWR wrote:

> The Ant design team has always stated that they wanted the Ant control language 
> to be descriptive, and not a scripting (or programming) language. And failed. If 
> you have variables (properties) and conditions (if="propname") you have a 
> programming language. So you better go for a real programming language. The 
> current situation is that we have the worst of all: it's not a programming 
> language, it's not a scripting language, it's not even XML anymore.

The way dependency lists are put inside a text array in an attribute
never was XML-ish (better use several depend children). Or the use of
flat-text property files (though pure XML is gaining ground).

Anyway, a lot of the shortfalls of ant syntax disappear when you couple
it to some xslt processing, but then you get bitten by the parts that
look like XML but aren't really (which can be workarounded without too
much effort, but is a PITA nevertheless).


Nicolas Mailhot

View raw message