The tools may or may not save you:

  • The tools will save you: The google calculator is amazing. For example, the total amount of energy released if the earth was turned into energy. Google is a tool. It saves me every day.
  • The tools will save you: Nutch, an open source search engine project that has Mitch Kapor and Tim O'Reilly on the advisory board [via Joi Ito]. Open source is a tool. It too saves me every day.
  • The tools will save you: Uche Ogbuji introduces Anobind, which looks startingly like xmltramp. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
  • The tools won't save you: Quote of the week: Shared syntax is the prerequisite for interop. [Bill de hÓra]. Note he said syntax, not infoset, not data model, but syntax. Sometimes the tools let you down.
  • The tools will save you: Boa Constructor, which I mentioned before as something I'd like to try, is awesome. Point, click, add a little Python code and BAM, you've got a cross platform GUI app. Maybe tightly bound tools can save you?
  • The tools didn't save me: Spent hours wrestling with TI Code Composer Studio. I was trying to use their point and click configuration tool to setup a DMA Controller. The GUI part just simple refused to accept some values I entered. It did, however, generate some C code which I was able to copy and paste into a working project, modify that very parameter I could not change via the GUI, and poof, it worked. So, that shoots down the idea of tightly bound tools having an edge.

[Another comment unrelated to your post]

Just wanted to say thanks for fixing whatever it was that made AmphetaDesk format your feed wider on the screen than other feeds. Now it formats same width as others and makes my life easier.

Posted by Jim Brown on 2003-08-15

I'm not sure how Bill's comment re. syntax affects whether or not tools will save us, but anyway, for what I reckon is a better (meta) view try snellspace :

"What the model-driven crowd needs to understand is that the syntax-driven folks will be swayed by their arguments only when they are presented with a serialization syntax that is simple and accessible to them.

What the syntax-driven crowd needs to understand is that the model-driven folks will only be happy with a syntax that is compatible and generic enough to work their model framework."

http://www.snellspace.com/blog/archivesNew/000041.html

btw, when I came across the Google calculator, I got excited and called the wife for a conversion to try - she suggested 10 euros in pounds sterling.

Need more tools...

Posted by Danny on 2003-08-20

I came across the following quote here:

"Uche Ogbuji introduces Anobind, which looks startingly like xmltramp. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery."

1) I had not heard of xmltramp until about 2 weeks ago, so I could not have "imitated" it for Anobind.  I have no problem acknowledging inspirational work, and have lauded ElementTree and gnosis.xml.objectify as starting points for Anobind.

2) You must not have actually read any Anobind code or API examples to be saying it is "startlingly" similar to xmltramp.  Both the API and the code is quite different between the two projects.

--Uche

Posted by Uche Ogbuji on 2003-09-07

Uche,
  Sorry, I meant no disrespect.

  You are correct, I was comparing them based solely on the examples given in their blurbs. Thanks for stopping by to clear up the 'lineage'.

Posted by Joe on 2003-09-07