Subject: RE: [xsl] XSLT vs Perl From: David Tolpin <dvd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 18:29:09 +0400 (AMT) |
> From owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Tue Feb 3 18:22:14 2004 > From: "Michael Kay" <mhk@xxxxxxxxx> > To: <xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: RE: [xsl] XSLT vs Perl > Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 14:05:01 -0000 > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="us-ascii" > > > I have just finished reading the working draft for XSLT 2.0. > > Forgive me the crudeness: what are advantages of XSLT 2.0 > > over Perl (http://www.perl.org/)? > > Quite similar to its advantages over a washing machine. > > If you want to wash clothes, use a washing machine, but if you want to > transform XML, use XSLT. A washing machine does not have means for transforming XML; Perl does. It has everything XSLT 2.0 has, and a more powerful syntax to express algorithms. XSLT 1.0 had simplicity and sharpness of a tool specifically oriented towards processing of XML. XSLT 2.0 does not have it anymore. For XSLT 1.0, the user is forced to clearly separate layers, and the XML layer is semantically clear. With XSLT 2.0, a lot of different things is in the same bag, without language tools to build abstraction layers, present and developed in Ruby, Python and Perl. XPath and Regular expressions are available for any language in the list, and XML parsers are there two; they are as convenient to use with them as with XSLT. What is the advantage of XSLT 2.0 over Perl or Python or Ruby? David Tolpin http://davidashen.net/ XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] XSLT vs Perl, Michael Kay | Thread | Re: [xsl] XSLT vs Perl, Peter Flynn |
Re: [xsl] XSLT vs Perl, Peter Flynn | Date | RE: [xsl] XSLT vs Perl, Rowland Shaw |
Month |