Re: [ANN] Candle 0.8 - a new scripting language for XML
XML is already given. And we cannot change it to make it a strong typed markup language. However, is it better for an markup language to be strong typed if invented from scratch? We may want to look at the history of high level programming languages. The early languages like Fortran and Basic were not strong-typed. But as C come out to be strong-typed, people realize the benefits, it helps avoid mistakes in the code. So does a strong-typed markup like Candle lose anything comparing to XML? Is it less extensible or flexible in anyway? You are invited to give comments. The fundamental concept behind Candle type system is that all values in the markup are strong-typed to be one of the pre-defined types. It is impossible to define all possible types people want and give each an unique syntax, so Candle's syntax hinting is only provided for a set of predefined types. And Candle type system has been designed to be a closed type system, that is any Candle expression on any Candle pre-defined types results in some pre-defined type in Candle. So that we don't have to invent new syntax everyday. Schema can then be used to extend or constrain on the pre-defined type and thus Candle should be as extensible as XML. This is like in C, you can define your struct and union as complicated as you like, but the primitive types in the language are just that many. Henry Elliotte Harold wrote: > "XML is only semi-structured with no explicit type information." is a > feature, not a bug. Removing it makes the data less useful, and the > format fairly uninteresting. XML would not be where it is today if it > featured strong data typing. >
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