"Functional"

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by Lynn McGuire, Sep 27, 2013.

  1. Lynn McGuire

    Willem Guest

    Ian Collins wrote:
    ) Malcolm McLean wrote:
    )> The alternative to using xml is to declare a specific syntax, as used by
    )> the Microsoft resource compiler, which pre-dates xml.
    )
    ) Or use a simple, well known and supported format such as JSON. My
    ) "full" JSON parser is about 200 lines of code.

    YAML is also a very good choice, a better choice if you want user-editability.


    The big problem with XML is that it's a *markup* language, never meant for
    and not very suited for data transport. The mind boggles as to why it
    became the defacto standard.


    SaSW, Willem
    --
    Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
    made in the above text. For all I know I might be
    drugged or something..
    No I'm not paranoid. You all think I'm paranoid, don't you !
    #EOT
     
    Willem, Oct 7, 2013
    #41
    1. Advertisements

  2. One assumes it is because of the mindshare already attained for things that
    end in "ML".

    --
    Modern Christian: Someone who can take time out from
    complaining about "welfare mothers popping out babies we
    have to feed" to complain about welfare mothers getting
    abortions that PREVENT more babies to be raised at public
    expense.
     
    Kenny McCormack, Oct 7, 2013
    #42
    1. Advertisements

  3. I have that check box between "Gives clear and unambiguous error
    messages" and "Handles failures gracefully", above the "does not
    invoke undefined behavior" box.

    Doesn't everybody else have the same? ;)
    "So, the essence of XML is this: the problem it solves is not hard,
    and it does not solve the problem well."
    (Simeon and Wadler, "The Essence of XML")

    "XML is homomorphic to s-expressions where the first element is
    atomic." (From memory, could not find a reference to the original.)
    And s-expressions have been with us much longer than XML.
     
    Roberto Waltman, Oct 8, 2013
    #43
  4. For similar reasons, (nice, simple, light-weight, small-is-beautiful,)
    I used tinyxml:

    http://www.grinninglizard.com/tinyxml/
     
    Roberto Waltman, Oct 8, 2013
    #44
  5. It's a legitimate criticism.

    But since xml is a standard, people know how to write xml tags. They can
    look at the file and tell you want it probably means.
    However the full standard is a bit too big to support easily. It was designed
    for marking up long publishing documents, not for little config files or
    lists of things to process. So you need to pull in a big third party
    toolkit.
    I will probably extend the vanilla xml parser to make it more compliant,
    but I checked the spec, and it's hard to support the whole thing.
     
    Malcolm McLean, Oct 9, 2013
    #45
  6. Lynn McGuire

    Ian Collins Guest

    It is. My parser/DOM implementation has grown to the point where it can
    parse and manipulate (Open)Office documents and that took a long time!
     
    Ian Collins, Oct 9, 2013
    #46
  7. Lynn McGuire

    Phil Carmody Guest

    I've seen reg-/stack-/env-dumps targz-ed up and then uuencoded into
    syslog. Unfortunately those dumps weren't in XML, else I could die
    a happy man, knowing that I'd seen the ultimate.

    Phil
     
    Phil Carmody, Oct 11, 2013
    #47
  8. Lynn McGuire

    Jorgen Grahn Guest

    Nor a "doesn't gratuitously use XML" one ...

    /Jorgen
     
    Jorgen Grahn, Oct 12, 2013
    #48
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.