cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Torsten Curdt <>
Subject Re: [RT][long] Cocoon 3.0: the necessary mutation
Date Mon, 05 Dec 2005 10:53:30 GMT
>>> Nevertheless, it is easier to build a tool around a declarative  
>>> language expressed as XML, than a procedural language expressed  
>>> as... a procedural programming language.
>> I'm sorry, Luca, but I think that's BS.
> <cut/>
>> For example, do you think that if the java classes were expressed  
>> as XML statements that *declarative* describe their methods and  
>> variables and inner classes it would be easier to write a tool  
>> like Eclipse?
> That I don't know, I've never seen the inner workings of Eclipse.
> Let's just say that when something is written in XML (say, an UML  
> model expressed as XMI) I can fire up Xalan and beat the beast into  
> submission easily, if the same mopel was expressed as a set of Java  
> classes... hmmm... time for "man yacc" ?

Easier development should not out-weight easier usage. But as long as
there is a grammar for creating an AST it is a piece of cake anyway.

> Maybe it's just that I've worked with XML for too long, but I still  
> like the easy production/validation/transformation of vocabularies  
> that comes with it, and I'm scared a bit by the other approach.

Don't be :)


View raw message