|
Subject: Re: [xsl] XSLT vs Perl From: roger.day@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 12:34:01 +0000 |
Xslt has been designed as a language with a purpose; perl has neither of
these attributes, hence perl's chaotic nature and unmaintainabilty. But I
think, as well, it's a matter of apples and pears. An XSLT application
would, IMO, also include Java or some other language. Perl fills in any gap
it can gets it's paws on, but I'd rather use python if push came to shove.
regards,
Roger
David Tolpin
<dvd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent by: cc:
owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [xsl] XSLT vs Perl
rrytech.com
03/02/2004 11:56
Please respond to xsl-list
Hi,
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/)?
David Tolpin
http://davidashen.net/
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
| Current Thread |
|---|
|
| <- Previous | Index | Next -> |
|---|---|---|
| RE: [xsl] Re: XSLT vs Perl, Jim Fuller | Thread | Re: [xsl] XSLT vs Perl, David Tolpin |
| Re: [xsl] FO Processor choice, Kobayashi | Date | Re: [xsl] FO Processor choice, bry |
| Month |