Re: [xsl] [OT] [xslt 2.0] Difference betwen functions and templates

[Justin Johansson <procode@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Yes, well, that left-field comment was strictly off-topic in an xsl-list sense
but it is extremely relevant to the basic OO principles that W3 standards**
including XSLT (now back to *on-topic*) seem to neglect.

**except DOM, which, in anycase, totally sucks

C++ is no doubt the mother/father of UML.

UML has been well migrated to address Java and some other languages
including the non-vernacula defence industry language, ADA.

(Or Java has adopted itself to a well-formed UML experience).

Search Google and you will find no tangible modelling of XML or XSLT using
UML.

XSLT cannot be realisticly modelled using UML.  I know because that was
the essence of my penultimate contract .. to produce IEEE standard
software engineering documentation for an XML/XSLT conundrum in a
$mill government contract,

That said, and I do say it authoritatively, XSLT currently remains a
great language for text-processing software bods but it *is* programming
in the small.  Personally I love XSLT 2.0 but I do see it's shortcomings
for programming in the large.

Like Forth (I once thought, in my 20's, it to be the next best thing to sliced
bread until I came to realize that it *was* programming in the small).

Programming in the large is about being able to design and develop software
systems that are amenable to both peer review and software life-cycle
maintenance
by people that are around when you (sic), the programmer in the small, are no
longer around.

Systems correctly modelled on UML at least have a greater chance of
doing that than ad-hoc programming with languages like XSLT, Forth an
so on.

XSLT, and possibly XQuery, remain to be the language of the high-priest
programmer in the small.  My last client hired me because I was the only
one they could find to do it (in Adelaide, South Australia).

Great for contract programmers to make $ while the sun shines but as one
of those I would still prefer to produce systems and documentation
that will outlast the memory of my sufferance working for them.

The poster who spurred my remarks, Florent Georges, is to be commended
for his reponse on the xsl-list.

Cheers to all on this list who wish for green (i.e. sustainable)
programming :-)

Justin Johansson


At 01:59 PM 19/07/2007 +0200, you wrote:
>Abel Braaksma wrote:
>
>  Hi
>
>  I try to not post off topic messages, but just for the aim of
>accuracy about what Abel said...
>
>> Sometimes you can interchange them (a struct in C++ can be 
>> replaced by a class), sometimes not (a struct can have
>> functions, but does not do encapsulation).
>
>  This is not true.  struct and class are exactly the same thing,
>except that the default access in struct is public and in class is
>private.
>
>  Regards,
>
>--drkm
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
_____________________________________________________________________________ 
>Ne gardez plus qu'une seule adresse mail ! Copiez vos mails vers Yahoo! Mail 
>
>
>
Justin Johansson
Freelance XML / XSLT / XQuery Developer