Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list commons-user@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 69460 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2003 15:55:05 -0000 Received: from umbongo.flamefew.net (64.253.103.114) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 8 Feb 2003 15:55:05 -0000 Received: by umbongo.flamefew.net (Postfix on Linux (i386), from userid 500) id 1F8333A2531; Sat, 8 Feb 2003 10:55:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by umbongo.flamefew.net (Postfix on Linux (i386)) with ESMTP id 1E627296E84 for ; Sat, 8 Feb 2003 10:55:06 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2003 10:55:06 -0500 (EST) From: Henri Yandell X-X-Sender: To: Jakarta Commons Users List Subject: Re: Jelly and X++ In-Reply-To: <1044716497.8299.9.camel@bryan.netmeme.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On 8 Feb 2003, Bryan Field-Elliot wrote: > I was disappointed there was no mention of Jelly, because (A) I could > really use a short-cut to grokking Jelly, and (B) now I'm really curious > how Jelly compares (in its typical use case) to X++. Are they apples and > oranges, or apples and apples? There's an article on Jelly at: http://www.zdnet.com.au/builder/program/java/story/0,2000034779,20269893,00.htm [Originally at builder.com, but I couldn't find that one quickly in google] Hen