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

If XML is too hard for a programmer, perhaps he'd be better off as a cro

• To: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
• Subject: If XML is too hard for a programmer, perhaps he'd be better off as a crossing guard
• From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>
• Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 22:13:40 -0700
• Cc: "Chet Murthy" <chet@w...>, xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: Message from "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...> of "Tue, 18 Mar 2003 21:52:44 PST." <B885BEDCB3664E4AB1C72F1D85CB29F805C1F72D@R...>
• Sender: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>

Tim's article just made me roll my eyes.  XML has made my life as a developer 
much easier, and i can't think of a developer whom I've mentored in using XML 
that doesn't have the same experience.  I suspect that Tim has completely 
misplaced the actual problem.

BTW, I find the idea of processing XML using simple regexen pretty hair 
raising.  Holy impedance mismatch!  Holy error prone!  That's supposed to be 
easier?  My mind boggles.

Bottom line, as I keep saying, the sky ain't falling on my head.  Ive never 
been more productive than since I've brought my career so much to focus on XML 
development.  Of course, my favorite language helped me a good deal of the way 
there.

> Tim is basically asking for pull-based XML parsers, implementations of
> which exist in .NET Framework and the Java world.

Python has pulldom, althugh I prefer DOM+Generators, myself.  I find them 
clearer and much easier.  It amused me to read:


> There isn't much
> difference between his mythical Holy Grail example
> 
> while (<STDIN>) {
>   next if (X<meta>X);
>   if    (X<h1>|<h2>|<h3>|<h4>X)
>   { $divert = 'head'; }
>   elsif (X<img src="/^(.*\.jpg)$/i>X)
>   { &proc_jpeg($1); }
>   # and so on...
> }
> 
> and its C# equivalent which has been available in the .NET Framework for
> over a year
> 
> 
> while (xmlreader.Read()){
> 
> 	if(reader.NodeType.Equals(XmlNodeType.Element) &&
> reader.Name.Equals("meta")){
> 		continue;
> 	}
> 
> 
>       if((reader.Name.Equals("h1") || reader.Name.Equals("h2")
> 	   || reader.Name.Equals("h3") || reader.Name.Equals("h4")) && 
>          reader.NodeType.Equals(XmlNodeType.Element)){
> 	 divert = "head";
>  
> 	}else if (reader.NodeType.Equals(XmlNodeType.Element) &&
> reader.Name.Equals("img")){
> 
> 		string jpegurl = reader.GetAttribute("src); 
> 
> 		if((jpegurl != null) && jpegurl.EndsWith(".jpg")){
> 				ProcessJpeg(jpegurl);
> 
> 		}
> 	}
> }

Hmm.  Both Tim's Perl and your C# seem more complex than the way I would code 
this in Python using DOM and generators.

I have copious examples of such here:

http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/01/08/py-xml.html

From seeing Don Box's talk at XML Web Services one, it seems .NET plans to 
implement a somewhat Pythonic form of iterators/generators.  Good.  Maybe .NET 
users won't be stuck with code like the above for too long.


-- 
Uche Ogbuji                                    Fourthought, Inc.
http://uche.ogbuji.net    http://4Suite.org    http://fourthought.com
Universal Business Language (UBL) - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/l
ibrary/x-think16.html
EXSLT by example - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/x-exslt.html
The worry about program wizards - http://www.adtmag.com/article.asp?id=7238
Use rdf:about and rdf:ID effectively in RDF/XML - http://www-106.ibm.com/develo
perworks/xml/library/x-tiprdfai.html
Keep context straight in XSLT - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/libra
ry/x-tipcurrent.html
Python Generators + DOM - http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/01/08/py-xml.html
Using SAX for Proper XML Output - http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/03/12/py-xml.ht
ml
SAX filters for flexible processing - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml
/library/x-tipsaxflex.html

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: If XML is too hard for a programmer, perhaps he'd be better off as a crossing guard
    • From: Liam Quin <liam@w...>
  • Re: If XML is too hard for a programmer, perhaps he'd be better off as a crossing guard
    • From: "Dimitre Novatchev" <dnovatchev@y...>
  • Re: If XML is too hard for a programmer, perhaps he'd bebetter off as a crossing guard
    • From: Jim Ancona <jim@a...>

• References:
  • RE: XML too hard for programmers?
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Schema files
• Next by Date: Re: OASIS/W3C
• Previous by thread: RE: XML too hard for programmers?
• Next by thread: Re: If XML is too hard for a programmer, perhaps he'd bebetter off as a crossing guard
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread