Re: Why Jam?

From: bill_kempf (williamkempf_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-22 17:24:05

--- In boost_at_y..., Karl Nelson <kenelson_at_e...> wrote:
> >  
> > > > And nearly anything would be better then m4.
> > > 
> > > "Nearly anything" won't necessarily accomplish what m4 
accomplishes.
> > > What would be some viable alternatives?
> > 
> > Huh?  m4 is just a scripting language that does macro expansion.  
> > Perl could have been used instead (and actually was considered).  
Or 
> > python.  Heck, even Java would work for this even though Java 
isn't a 
> > scripting language.
> 
> What is wrong with m4?  I have in the past attempted to replicate
> what m4 does with perl and others and other languages really aren't
> as elegant as they seem.  You end up constantly switching from the
> output stream to the programming language.  

Other then the fact that's an obscure language with few people who 
actually know it, I've also found it to be a pain to use.  But the 
latter could just be me.

Bill Kempf