Re: [xml-dev] Feasibility of "do all application coding in the XML langu

["Dimitre Novatchev" <dnovatchev@gmail.com>]

> Here is a response from a colleague:
>
> "... in general XSLT is cool but limited. If your transform requires any "higher math" or advanced functionality or external code libraries (such as geometry coordinate system libraries), you almost always have to go back to a higher level language (such as Java) at some point."
>
> Does my colleague make a TRUE or FALSE statement?


Predominantly FALSE. It is incorrect when someone makes such a
definite judgement about area they don't know well. Such judgement
only reflects their insufficient grasp of the subject.

If someone stills doesn't know it, the FXSL library (written entirely
in XSLT) implements so much of "higher math", that it has been
critisized by some people for this. Here are just some examples,
quoted from

http://www.idealliance.org/papers/extreme/proceedings/html/2006/Novatchev01/EML2006Novatchev01.html#t5
:

  Numerical differentiation

  Numerical integration

  Limits of sequences

  Trigonometric functions, hyperbolic trigonometric functions

  Logarithmic and exponentiation functions

  Inverse trigonometric functions

  Roots of a continuous function with one real variable

  Random numbers

  Random numbers with specified distribution

  Randomisation of lists/node-sets


There is a lot more "advanced functionality" implemented in FXSL, that
is typically not provided by an imperative language or is not easier
to implement in imperative settings:

  Higher-order functions

  Functional composition

  Partial application, currying

  Dynamic creation of functions

  Generic iteration

  Generic recursion over lists

  Generic recursion over trees

  Mapping, zipping, splitting, filtering of lists

  Generic binary search in Ordered

  Generic sort in Ordered

  A lot of string procerssing, such as spelling-checking, concordance
building, finding anagrams, ..., etc.

  General graph traversal.

  Genaral LR(1) parsing.


Lastly, the statement that compared to XSLT Java is "a higher level
language (such as Java) ", really made my day :)


-- 
Cheers,
Dimitre Novatchev
---------------------------------------
Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence.
---------------------------------------
To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk
-------------------------------------
Never fight an inanimate object
-------------------------------------
You've achieved success in your field when you don't know whether what
you're doing is work or play





On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 7:38 AM, Costello, Roger L. <costello@mitre.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> I am exploring the idea of "do all application coding in the XML languages."
>
> Here is a response from a colleague:
>
> "... in general XSLT is cool but limited. If your transform requires any "higher math" or advanced functionality or external code libraries (such as geometry coordinate system libraries), you almost always have to go back to a higher level language (such as Java) at some point."
>
> Does my colleague make a TRUE or FALSE statement?
>
> /Roger
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
> to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
> spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.
>
> [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
> Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@lists.xml.org
> subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@lists.xml.org
> List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
>
>