Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

TorgoX (1933)

TorgoX
  sburkeNO@SPAMcpan.org
http://search.cpan.org/~sburke/
"Il est beau comme la retractilité des serres des oiseaux rapaces [...] et surtout, comme la rencontre fortuite sur une table de dissection d'une machine à coudre et d'un parapluie !" -- Lautréamont
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

DOM 2 Comments More | Login | Reply /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • I would hate less W3C in general but more OO-heads in particular...

  • Nice graphic! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mir (51) <xmltwig@gmail.com> on 2002.08.18 12:43 (#11907) Homepage Journal
    I must say that I have no problem with the DOM class hierarchy. An XML document is quite a complex thing and I think the DOM does a good job at modeling it.
    I hate the API though, or at least I hate the fact that everybody uses the Java version of the API (even in Perl!), and I think it sucks as a general XML tree-transformation tool.
    The oft-heard argument that it makes sense to have the same API in different languages so people can go from one to the other is IMHO ridiculous. If you want a Java API then use Java, and when you code in Perl use a Perl API. Why not include C's ridiculous for( i=0; i++; i<2) in Perl, and throw away our beloved arrow so method calls "look more like Java's"? Wait... ;-) (just to make it clear: I love the arrow and the argument IS ridiculous)

    --
    mirod
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.