Comments

2 responses to “more on trackback”

1. 2004/03/27

   Patrick Chanezon

   re: more on trackback

   some notes I wrote about Trackback and Pingback last year: http://radio.weblogs.com/0105673/2003/02/13.html#a467 But if you’re in Blosxom, ie in perl, why not use the MT script ? In other systems and languages you can always find someone who implemented it: http://blojsom.sourceforge.net/javadoc/org/blojsom/blog/Trackback.html

   P@

   Reply
2. 2004/03/27

   alecm

   re: more on trackback

   I will use the MT cgi scripts – eventually; I am a programmer, and can I do this. I finished my first million lines of code in 1991 when my stack of historic fanfold fell-over somewhere past the eight-foot mark.

   However unlike some of our colleagues I do not necessarily view quick-hacks and kludges and “opportunity for integration” to be a good thing. The core Blosxom code that I have reviewd looks pretty tight, but a lot of the plugins suck, badly. Multiple instances of the same multiply-indirect hash de-reference rather than a clean copy-out/poke/copyback, for instance.

   This sort of thing leads to cut-and-paste programming.

   But I do not mind being a heretic – likewise I consider Object Orientation to be a good thing when implemented in a purist manner, but typically a very bad thing when the average programmer gets ahold of it. Hours of trawling through Java foundation classes to code that _almost_ DWIW, convinced me of this; also I found the code quality of average (and some supposedly “superior”) Java programmer(s) to be appalling.

   Similarly i believe XML to be a lot easier than other colleagues make it out to be, and indeed wonder if it is not really a job-creation scheme amongst software engineers, each hell-bent upon having their own DTD.

   To me it’s not unlike the OSS-wannabees who believe they’ve changed the world by releasing a new set of skins for XINE or XMMS.

   Reply