Re: Generating C# from Java (Was: fit, nfit, et al?)

Jim Little wrote:
> One -- I'm _not_ interested in writing a general-purpose Java -> C#
> translator.
> Two -- Trying to keep multiple revisions of the same codebase in sync is
> a complicated pain in the ass.
> 
> Not to mention that having to keep multiple revisions in sync is a major
> disincentive to making changes.
> 
> So I'm not so sure that a generator isn't the simplest thing.  At the
> moment, my thoughts are running along the lines of a simplistic parser /
> regex thingie that also has Javadoc-ish comments to help direct the
> process.

It's a cute idea, but I'm a little sceptical. One of the critical 
requirements for Fit is that it should be easy for developers to write 
Fixtures, and possibly Parse's too. We have to make sure that we don't 
lose sight of that in a generated version.

There's also something to be said for having two similar but different 
versions as they can spark ideas for each other. That's certainly our 
experience in the mock objects world (although we do have problems 
finding the time to do /anything/). And NUnit improved no end once it 
left its JUnit roots behind.

Don't forget that there are also all those other languages to support, 
so unless we come up with a more general solution (interesting research 
topic), I doubt that fixing C# is going to be the major drag on Fit as a 
whole.

S.