http://blogoforum.com/tag/code+link Talk about code and link http://blogoforum.com/tag/code+development+dkrukovsky+generation+link+programming/re-code-generation-450.html I think you might be missing the point of code generation. You don't write a code generator to get a job done... you write it to get a job done MANY TIMES. If you are able to write code that does something and does it well, why not write a generator that can reproduce that code (and even with customizable situation specific variations) again for you the next time you encounter a similar problem? Rail's generators are there to save you from having to reinvent the wheel every time you want to work on a project. Web projects have fundamentally simliar basic frameworks. Why spend time and effort rebuilding that framework every time you need to pop out a website? Spend your time and effort on the stuff that makes the website unique or innovative instead. - 2 replies Sun, 17 Sep 2006 09:36:16 GMT http://blogoforum.com/tag/code+development+dkrukovsky+generation+link+programming/re-code-generation-450.html http://blogoforum.com/tag/code+development+dkrukovsky+generation+link+programming/code-generation-417.html Bill Venners ( http://www.artima.com/weblogs/index.jsp?blogger=bv ) wrote "Code Generation: The Real Lesson of Rails" : http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=152273 I haven't dig deep into Rails. Maybe code generation might be useful somewhere. But in general case, here is a simple statement for you to discuss. If you can write code which takes some data and generates another code which then does the job. Then you should be absolutely able to write code which takes data and does the job. Why take extra code generation step? Do you have examples which break this statement? Denis Krukovsky. - 1 reply Fri, 17 Mar 2006 10:47:31 GMT http://blogoforum.com/tag/code+development+dkrukovsky+generation+link+programming/code-generation-417.html