Tool development: by Perl-wrapped XQuery

[Michael Ludwig]

David A. Lee schrieb:

>>> * Encourage scripting languages developers to embed these XML
>>> languages directly into the scripting languages (say perl).
>> More precisely, write bindings to implementations in C/C++.
>>
> Only if the scripting language itself is written in C/C++ or has easy
> bindings to it.  If its in another language then bindings in that
> language are useful.

True. I only thought of Perl/PHP/Python/Ruby - all in C. But Jython and
JRuby were mentioned, and I could mention Quercus - all in Java.

> But equally important, IMHO,  is to be able to "glue" the data from
> one module to another efficiently.  That needs common in-memory
> formats.

That's the downside of issuing specifications and waiting for the
implementations to happen. Thank God XML does have a standard
serialization, so any document can migrate from one implementation
to another :-)

> That may mean, for example, that the language runtime define a
> standard XML in-memory representation and every module can use it
> natively. So that you can have say variables of XML Documents and not
> have to transform them to each module's internal representation
> (rebuild the document).
>
> To do this well I suggest is more then just writing bindings.  Its a
> language level problem as well as a binding problem.

Isn't .NET a solution to that problem?

-- 
Michael Ludwig