[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: Greenspun's tenth law rears its head: was InnerXml is like

• To: "'Arjun Ray'" <aray@n...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Greenspun's tenth law rears its head: was InnerXml is like printf (WAS: Underwhelmed)
• From: Bill de hÓra <dehora@a...>
• Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 14:25:49 +0100
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <2kjtousnk80vl3v0dtncm32dl899aanqis@4...>
• Reply-to: <dehora@a...>

> From: Arjun Ray [mailto:aray@n...] 
>
> Yes, as a tree-building "little language".  Miles has already 
> said that there's a bit of devil's advocacy in all this, but 
> that shouldn't prevent us from exploring the idea.

Sure.
 
> | Fwiw, I don't see *either* of these as that desirable to program in 
> | (but probably better than what I'm already using).
> 
> Which is...? ;-)

DOM/JDOM/SAX/XmlReader... essentially, not XSLT.


> Not in XOM.  Method chaining is Bad Java, so they say.  
> Mutators have void return signatures. 

If that's an argument from thread safety (is it?), then I guess if you
got multiple threads running through a treebuilding exercise, you've got
other problems. Maybe constructors returning 'this' is a bad idea. But
for anyone that's interested: the book "a little java, a few patterns"
is an interesting counterpoint to this mutators return void argument. A
nice read.


> Some people like long names.  In these days where IDE editors 
> support name completion, it isn't a big deal.  (I prefer 
> short names myself, btw.)

Well me too, until I can get an ide to read for me! Not that I'm asking
for APL or anything...; "append" would be fine. It's when you use an API
day in day out, using two words in computerEnglisch when one was enough
gets tedious. 

  
> | At this point, we might as well give in and use Lisp, being 
> a natural 
> | fit for manipulating syntax trees.
> 
> Well, the discussion seemed to heading that way.  Modulo the 
> surface syntax, isn't XPath very lispish in feel?

If you're thinking about Lisp macros, yes. I think XSLT is Lispish, but
then look at it?s Daddy, DSSSL.


Bill de hÓra 
--
Propylon
www.propylon.com 

 

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Greenspun's tenth law rears its head: was InnerXmlis like printf (WAS: Underwhelmed)
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• References:
  • Re: Greenspun's tenth law rears its head: was InnerXml is like printf (WAS: Underwhelmed)
    • From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Can i specify more than one root element in the specification?
• Next by Date: RE: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
• Previous by thread: Re: Greenspun's tenth law rears its head: was InnerXml is like printf (WAS: Underwhelmed)
• Next by thread: RE: Greenspun's tenth law rears its head: was InnerXmlis like printf (WAS: Underwhelmed)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread