Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: advocating XML
 Paul T wrote - (I've removed most of it as it was long) > > No, it was not. It was worse, and I'd try to explain why. > > Now if you map the A.xml into *regex*line*oriented* file, I bet > you be surprised how *trivial* the overall task becomes if doing > it in python or perl or any other scripting language that inherits > from UNIX. > > Not only you'd write this set of converters faster ( because you > be using a general-purpose language *which xslt is not* ), but > what you produce will be *correct* , easy to *debug* and *really* > error-prone. > Well, I've also done the regex route, both with python and awk. In fact, in this job, I got the form data into the database using python, no xslt or xml involved. And I've generated enough html programmatically to know that I'd rather use templates than functions. If I have a straight line-oriented job I'll probably look at awk first, then python. So I do know what you're talking about here. In fact, I'd bet that a lot of the people on this list have used their own private text formats which they turn into xml using a script and some RE or string processing. > Anyone who votes XSLT for programming language should take > into account that xslt *silently* *ignores* almost any mistyping > you have in Xpath expression. And there is no possible guard > ( because building the guard kills the XSLT itself ;-) > > With regular expressions and accurate design of the 'line' > you *do* have a guard ! I find regular expressions at least as difficult and error prone as xslt expressions. I suppose it's a matter of practice and how your mind works. Either way, I have to do a LOT of testing. I usually find it's easier to break a tricky RE than an xslt statement, but your mileage may vary, as always. > > Will do just * fine* for Python or perl. You'd have less code to process > this stuff comparing even to amount of code you need to use the SAX machinery > and when somebody says that : > > 'there are better layers upon SAX' in Python, > I'd say : "No. It is too complex. All you need is 3 lines of regexprs - get real". Depends on the job. In this case, I'd need several scripts that play together, and output some format, like HTML. I could easily have done it with straight scripts. I tell you what, though. For a quick one-time thing, I'd probably use a script and be done with it. But when I expect to do something over and over with variations, I find I want templates and program/document generators. I look back at some jobs where I created a bunch of html by scripting, and wish I had done them with templates instead. If you are using xml, then xslt is a natural to use for templates, although you could of course use something else. And some things are still done better with scripts. In the job I mentioned, I used a mix. So I actually agree with most of what you said, but I still come out with a different conclusion. Well, go figure! Thanks for your thoughts. Cheers, Tom P 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
