The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 |
From: Phil Hagelberg <p...@hagelb.org>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 23:01:23 -0800
Local: Sat, Nov 20 2010 2:01 am
Subject: Re: Minimizing the number of model implementations
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 6:50 AM, Chas Emerick <cemer...@snowtide.com> wrote: Hmmm--I suppose I should have been clearer. I'm in favour of > I'm amazed that we're debating the value of a declarative > specification. It's very hard (nigh impossible) to accurately assess > the origins of others' opinions, but I can only suspect that knocking > declarative builds (as imperfect and flawed as the current > implementations of those are) comes from an insufficient regard of > history, namely make and ant in this case. I've used them, abused > them, and thankfully forgotten much about them – but their approach is > not made better simply because it's been implemented in Clojure. declarative builds, (obviously, all Clojure build tools are declarative at heart), it's the 100% no-compromises declarative that I'm not fond of. I'm using the term "dynamism" to refer to what Antony seems to be railing against--the notion that you can have an escape hatch and put executable code in your build configuration. -Phil You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||