use Perl

• re: XML::Parser (Score:1)

  by vek (2312)

  I think it might have something to do with the fact that Clark Cooper has all but disappeared from the face of the planet Earth (a la Enno Derksen of XML::Checker fame). The same issue was raised on the perl-xml mailing list recently. Some guy called Matt Sergeant (whoever he is - grin) made an offer to maintain it.
  
  I think many of the perl-xml hackers have their attention focused on more "sexy" modules (XML::SAX* or XML::LibXML etc) and XML::Parser has been somewhat forgotten about.
  • Re: XML::Parser (Score:1)

    by TorgoX (1933)

    Wow, synchronicity! XML-Parser [cpan.org] 2.31 was released earlier today!
    • Re: XML::Parser (Score:2)

      by darobin (1316)

      Yup, all of the above is correct, and also XML::Parser is not all that important, it's on the deprecation slope. As soon as the XS version of XML::SAX::Expat is finished, it'll clearly belong to another age of XML programming. If you write anything now, I'd strongly advise against using XML::Parser directly.

      --
      

      -- Robin Berjon [berjon.com]
      • Re: XML::Parser (Score:1)

        by TorgoX (1933)

        Well, if a neophyte were looking in CPAN for an XML parser, he would pick something called "XML::Parser" anyday, over something with the indecypherable name "XML::Sax::Expat". And if he looks at XML::Parser and sees something that doesn't really work, or is just a heap of cruft, that makes all of Perldom look bad.
        • Re: XML::Parser (Score:1)

          by clintp (2) on 2002.04.03 8:22 (#6589)

          Personally I like XML::Parser. It's what I'm used to, does everything I want, and doesn't give me a crufty feeling at all (not like, say, CGI.pm). *shrug*

          Reply to This

          Parent

          • Re: XML::Parser (Score:1)

            by pudge (1)

            Yay clintp!
            
            Although, I still like CGI.pm too ...