Lists Home |
Date Index |
* Oleg Tkachenko <firstname.lastname@example.org> [2004-12-28 05:06]:
> Alan Gutierrez wrote:
> > Java is not assembler. XSLT can be mind-boggling complex.
> > It is function programming, which is a leap. It isn't the
> > easiest way to learn functional programming either.
> Well, you might forgot, but SAX isn't the easiest and natural way of XML
> processing either (and that's why Microsoft went with pull-based
> XmlReader alternative in .NET instead).
This, I will /never/ forget. :^)
> The whole push paradigm (be it SAX or push style programming in XSLT) is
> sort of mind-boggling untill you get it.
The OP (Dana) was saying why use assembler when you could use a
higher-level language. My point was that XSLT is not invariably
easier that Java and SAX, not that XSLT was invariably more
compliated. No is my point that it is more difficult to learn,
but that it can be, it's not a user-friendly macro language.
Alan Gutierrez - email@example.com