Ryan Davis wrote:
> Farmer Ted likes simplicity and clarity, not obfuscation and bulk:

I value simplicity and calrity too. Reap is certainly not perfect but
it is far from obfuscated or bulky. Wherein it is more complex it is
also more capable. In fact, the first day I wrote Reap it was almost
exactly what Hoe is now, the only significant exception being that I
used a YAML file for the project information rather than a Ruby block.

> >> On Sep 20, 2006, at 7:15 AM, khaines / enigo.com wrote:
> >>
> >>> How does the use case for Hoe differ from REAP?
> >>> http://reap.rubyforge.org/
> >>
> >> Farmer Ted likes simplicity and clarity, not obfuscation and bulk:
> >>
> >> % find hoe -type f | grep -v svn | xargs wc -l | tail -1
> >>     345 total
> >>
> >> % find reap-6.0.2 -type f | xargs wc -l | tail -1
> >>   16301 total
> >> % find facets-1.7.46 -type f | xargs wc -l | tail -1
> >>   67091 total

That's very misleading. First you should include Rake in Hoe's counts.
Plus if you knew anything at all about Facets, you would know that
while it offers LOTS of capability, but you only need to load the
particular "facets" your project needs. Making a rough estimate, Reap
probably loads less than 300 LOC of Facets.

> You need to learn your fruits! It just so happens Farmer Ted is a
> fruit farmer these days and even he agrees your rebuke is without
> merit. You yourself asked "How does the use case for Hoe differ from
> REAP" and that is what I compared. Besides, by just comparing .rb
> files you're hiding plenty of complexity:
>
> % find reap-6.0.2 -type f | xargs wc -l | tail -1
>     16301 total
> % find rake-0.7.1 -type f | xargs wc -l | tail -1
>      8694 total

Rather I think your simplistic inspection is hiding it's own
complexity. Since I make an effort to write a fair amount of
documentation and include that in the package plus provide  "in progess
work" for others to peak at, you are indeed counting apples and
oranges. To be sure we can ask Reap:

% reap count
FILES: 23, LINES: 3667 (CODE: 2058, DOC: 823, SPACE: 786)

> >>> Since REAP tasks can be used as rake tasks, there seems to me to
> >>> be a lot of overlap between the two projects.  Yes?  No?
> >>
> >> no, there is very little overlap, because my project is so small.

Indeed Hoe is really just an add on to Rake. And it's simplicity is
commendable. Perhaps I should have been content to leave Reap as such a
project. But simplicity can also lead to limitations. I ran into those
and decided to take Reap further. And I continue to do so....

> No, I never looked at reap. I wouldn't touch it or facets with
> someone else's ten foot pole.

Interesting. You've never looked at it, but you wouldn't go near it? On
what basis are you making a judgement then? Moreover, I really do not
see any reason for you to be denegrating about it.

T.