Comments on: RE: Dynamicity and Throwing Money at Problems http://barelyenough.org/blog/2005/06/re-dynamicity-and-throwing-money-at-problems/ Tue, 06 Jan 2009 21:54:56 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Peter Williams http://barelyenough.org/blog/2005/06/re-dynamicity-and-throwing-money-at-problems/#comment-39 Peter Williams Mon, 13 Jun 2005 21:59:29 +0000 http://pezra.barelyenough.org/blog/2005/06/brian-mccallister/#comment-39 <p>I agree that the dynamicity argument is not usually an outright lie, there is usually support for dynamicity, but it is a bit of misdirection because the dynamicity is rarely the primary benefit of these XML dialect.</p> <p>I think the misdirection exists to protect the developer and/or users from cognitive dissonance (I would guess that this is subconcious in most cases) or to make some managers feel nice while the worker bees actually get the job done.</p> I agree that the dynamicity argument is not usually an outright lie, there is usually support for dynamicity, but it is a bit of misdirection because the dynamicity is rarely the primary benefit of these XML dialect.

I think the misdirection exists to protect the developer and/or users from cognitive dissonance (I would guess that this is subconcious in most cases) or to make some managers feel nice while the worker bees actually get the job done.

]]> By: Brian McCallister http://barelyenough.org/blog/2005/06/re-dynamicity-and-throwing-money-at-problems/#comment-38 Brian McCallister Mon, 13 Jun 2005 21:34:30 +0000 http://pezra.barelyenough.org/blog/2005/06/brian-mccallister/#comment-38 <p>Valid points, though it was not an intentional red herring. It <em>is</em> deferring to runtime, which fits my definition of dynamicity -- just nothing is gained. The DSL angle is exactly on.</p> <p>-Brian</p> Valid points, though it was not an intentional red herring. It is deferring to runtime, which fits my definition of dynamicity — just nothing is gained. The DSL angle is exactly on.

-Brian

]]>