Re: [xsl] <quote>XSL is NOT easy</quote>

Subject: Re: [xsl] <quote>XSL is NOT easy</quote>
From: "bryan rasmussen" <rasmussen.bryan@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 10:52:01 +0200
Hmm, not sure if I would classify Xquery as a functional language.
Declarative, sure, I guess query languages tend to be, but not sure
about the functional. Why do you say it is?

Bryan Rasmussen

On 6/26/07, M. David Peterson <m.david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 01:45:50 -0600, M. David Peterson
<m.david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> <quote>
> LISP is worth learning for a different reason  the profound
> enlightenment experience you will have when you finally get it. That
> experience will make you a better programmer for the rest of your days,
> even if you never actually use LISP itself a lot.
> </quote>
>  Eric S. Raymond, "How to Become a Hacker" @

Here's another really good quote which is where I originally located the
above quote,

This melding of code and data is central to all dialects of Lisp, and is
fundamental to the way Microsoft is integrating multiple expression
languages (most notably SQL) in future versions of the Microsoft(r) .NET

-- Don Box, "Scheme is Love", MSDN Magazine {End Bracket}, October, 2005 @

In short, while functional programming languages such as Lisp, Scheme,
Haskell, XSLT, and XQuery might seem difficult to understand, their
influence on the main stream programming languages of the past and present
is obvious (XSLT, XQuery, JavaScript, Python, and Ruby are all good
examples of modern day programming languages heavily rooted in Lisp and
Scheme), and their future influence is undeniable,

Learn them now and have a *GREAT* programming job in 10 years.  XSLT,
XQuery, JavaScript, Python, Ruby, Haskell, and Smalltalk are *ALL*
wonderful languages that everyone should learn at least one of *REALLY*


M. David Peterson | |

Current Thread