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

Re: Python and JSON vs XML???

• To: Bob Foster <bob@o...>
• Subject: Re: Python and JSON vs XML???
• From: Alan Gutierrez <alan-xml-dev@e...>
• Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 21:35:35 -0400
• Cc: Dare Obasanjo <dareo@m...>, Michael Champion <michaelc.champion@g...>, XML Developers List <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <430DFA7D.8010703@o...>
• Mail-followup-to: Bob Foster <bob@o...>,Dare Obasanjo <dareo@m...>,Michael Champion <michaelc.champion@g...>,XML Developers List <xml-dev@l...>
• References: <e3a5cb2c05082500045293f51e@m...> <830178CE7378FC40BC6F1DDADCFDD1D104D0CE32@R...> <430DFA7D.8010703@o...>
• User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

* Bob Foster <bob@o...> [2005-08-25 13:06]:
> Dare Obasanjo wrote:
> >I think you are overanalyzing the issue. The fact is that developers using 
> >object oriented programming languages like treating distributed 
> >applications as distributed object applications.

> Yes <sigh> today's developers want everything to be objects. The
> list of useful entities that are not objects is quite long - XML,
> relational tables and records, higher-order functions, patterns,
> messages, etc. - but developers will have none of these unless
> they can see them through OOP-colored glasses, no matter how
> horribly awkward or inefficient the translation.

    Web application programming, the client-side, scripting heavy
    sort that people are flocking to today, is a path that forces
    successful application developers to abandon objects.

    JavaScript is a weak OO langauge, since it lacks inhertience,
    and polymorphism. There are no namepsaces, so modular programing
    is difficult. Reuse is already hard enough to coordinate, see
    how far you get without package/unit/library facilities in the
    host language.
    
    Programmers will buy into the textbook notion that you can work
    around this with JavaScripts prototypes, but soon find that they
    have poorly organized, bloated classes.

    And then, of course, the OO facilities in JavaScript are slow.
    JavaScript handles many small objects, the natural direction of
    OO programming, very poorly.

    I've done some hacking on Mozile, a CSS editor that's built on
    Gecko. It followed a familiar path in development.

    In 0.6 they attempted to create an cross-browser abstraction
    layer, so that the editor would work on IE, Mozilla, and Safari.
    This never happens, and it didn't happen. The editor only ever
    worked on Gecko, and because of the extra layer, it worked
    slowly. 

    In 0.7 the editor is written directly to Gecko. It's functions
    only, manipulating the DOM. 

    There is a natural direction from this realzation, is toward and
    application that application uses closures to specify editor
    behaviors, which, since they are used in all scripted event
    handlers, are vetted, and perform quite well.

--
Alan Gutierrez - alan@e...
    - http://engrm.com/blogometer/index.html
    - http://engrm.com/blogometer/rss.2.0.xml

• References:
  • Python and JSON vs XML???
    • From: Michael Champion <michaelc.champion@g...>
  • RE: Python and JSON vs XML???
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
  • Re: Python and JSON vs XML???
    • From: Bob Foster <bob@o...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Python and JSON vs XML???
• Next by Date: Re: Python and JSON vs XML???
• Previous by thread: Re: Python and JSON vs XML???
• Next by thread: Re: Python and JSON vs XML???
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread