At 12:04 26/10/00 -0700, I wrote: >If I can also build task definitions using scripts, then so much thebetter. Why not allow as many extension mechanisms as possible?
because we could end up with a perl. In perl every task can be done at least 3 different ways and some constructs can be done 15 different ways !!!! It is any wonder that many people find perl hard to use.
Sure. I am a huge detractor of perl. However, I'm not arguing for 3 ways to do everything (although having BSF support in there suggests a sort of tower of babel waiting for us), but a way to extend Ant on the fly, when there's no way to do something. Hence a <script> tag that let's me define tasks. There's very little risk to this, it won't pollute mainline Ant.
One of the aims of ant is simplicity. I don't want to have to think while building build.xml files ;) I am not saying I oppose definigng scripts via scripting I am still not sure in that case
I suppose your being ironic here, I certainly intend to keep thinking while I write build.xml files, although, I wouldn't be against using an IDE tool to construct them (hallelujah).
--
// Patrick C. Beard // Java Runtime Enthusiast -- "Will invoke interfaces for food." // mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
