[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Mike Kozlowski <mlk@klio.org> writes:
>> Spot on. I certainly remember feeling a similar sentiment when I
>> began using Ant. I want to write my Ant buildfiles in "Ant", not in
>> "XML".
>
> That's precisely what I don't want to do. The best thing about XML
> configuration files is that I already know the syntax -- I don't
> need to remember whether it's #, //, or ; that marks a comment,
> whether I need a special character at the end of every line, what
> character I use to quote strings, how I do escaping, or anything.
It's a good point -- a standard syntax does have advantages you
mention. I just find that XML is cumbersome to enter, and often
difficult to read.
> With XML files, the syntax is standard and universal.
Sure -- its strength and its weakness, I suppose. As far as I'm
concerned, it's more of a weakness when I have to type it in with my
own fingers.
> (Plus, XML-aware editors make it easy to only view the parts of a
> large configuration file that matter to me, while ignoring the
> uninteresting parts.)
Another good point.
Cheers,
Paul
--
Paul Jensen <psj@foreignkey.com>
|
