I am not one of those people. I use mini-lang almost exclusively.
-Adrian
On 3/5/2012 7:46 PM, Anil Patel wrote:
Adrian,
Thanks for starting this thread.
While we all love mini-lang, I am wondering if we should really ask ourselves
if we really want to overhaul mini-lang or should we consider alternates. From
what I know, Not many people like to build application using mini lang. Many
end up using Java or Groovy.
Thanks and Regards
Anil Patel
HotWax Media Inc
On Mar 5, 2012, at 9:47 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
Mini-language has evolved a lot over the years. Most of the development has
occurred on an as-needed basis, so there is no clear design or implementation -
things just get tacked on over time.
A recent discussion has opened up the possibility to rework the
mini-language<set> element. From my perspective, that task is long overdue.
Also, the schemas are out of date, and they are unnecessarily complicated. So,
those need a thorough going over.
While we are at it, why don't we create a draft design document based on the
current implementation, and then use it to look for other ways mini-language
can be improved? We can all offer suggestions and comments, agree on a final
design, finalize the draft, and then implement it in code. The design document
then becomes the developer's reference.
What do you think?
-Adrian
