Re: agx: Moving forward

Martin Aspeli wrote:
> Daniel Nouri <daniel.nouri@...> writes:
> 
>>You end up spending your time fixing ArchGenXML, when all you want is to
>>create a program that does it right.  Why carry on with the burden of
>>extending the old ArchGenXML just so it fits our (ArchGenXML- wise)
>>unusual kind of code?
> 
> I think this is a danger. I'm assuming Reinout intends to work with AGX as it is
> now only to save time during initial prototyping, playing and planning, and then
> strip out the AGX code. Unless he wants genesis to be self-hosting, of course. :)

I'll use archgenxml only in so far as handy (for some parts it holds up 
quite nicely atm).

And in the end, yes, I want genesis to be self-hosting! With proper 
module files with all classes in one python file and so. If genesis 
can't generate genesis we've failed, I'd say.

Hey, what better functional test could you want :-) :-) :-)

Reinout

-- 
Reinout van Rees                       r.van.rees @ zestsoftware.nl
http://vanrees.org/weblog/                  http://zestsoftware.nl/
"Military engineers build missiles. Civil engineers build targets."



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642