incubator-callback-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brian>
Subject Re: Consistent implementation of the whitelist
Date Wed, 01 Feb 2012 17:24:40 GMT
This is precisely why I was using Python in a bunch of disconnected
shell scripts in the orig Cordova prototype work. Agree however that
using Node would be a preferable tool for the job overall. A Python
shim for the bits that it cannot do is completely pragmatic.

On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Patrick Mueller <> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 15:42, Andrew Lunny <> wrote:
>> * @pmuellr: there is no good pure JS XML parser in Node; there are bindings
>> to libxml2, but we can't reasonably expect end-users to have the external
>> dependencies for that. I have been using -
>> - but it lacks some features -
>> notably support for namespaces and the concept of a document (which affects
>> absolute XPath selectors)
> I could care less about XPath, but support for namespaces is presumably
> required to be able to successfully parse android XML files, right?  I
> assume there will be a need to do that, in the tooling, somewhere.
> The reason I asked about XML parsers for node, if it wasn't obvious, is
> that I'd like to see the tooling implemented on node (and CoffeeScript :-).
>  But I'm not married to it.  Python would be my next choice - it's widely
> available on all of the desktop platforms we would support the tooling on.
>  WebKit has traditionally done all their tooling in Perl, but over the last
> few years, mainly due to the Googlites, the tooling is migrating to Python.
>  The only issue that comes up is having to support old versions of Python
> for ancient versions of Mac OS X.
> Another alternative would be to write most of the tooling in node, and do
> the XML parsing with a single Python script, whose sole purpose in life
> would be to read XML and spit out a stream of DOM nodes (or something).
>  Eventually there's got to be an XML parser for node, right?  RIGHT?
> Another conclusion re: node not supporting XML might be: we shouldn't be
> using XML for our configuration files.  JSON isn't a great alternative,
> since it's neither human readable or writable.  Or maybe something like
> this json tool helps [1].  CoffeeScript Object Notation [2] would probably
> be workable.  YAML maybe.
> [1]
> [2]
> --
> Patrick Mueller

View raw message