On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 2:17 AM, Vok Vojwo <cev...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2011/12/7 Peter Bex <peter....@xs4all.nl>: >> >> Actually, the main reason is that SSAX is a horrible mess which has >> many completely unrelated procedures all mixed together. >> There are several egg that provide different sets of procedures >> from the SSAX project. Most eggs include all files from the SSAX >> project to make it easy to update them, but they don't install them >> all. >> >> The proper place to do this is in the sxml-serializer egg, and >> we definitely should *not* be adding random procedures to sxpath. >> >> (the *REALLY* proper way would be to drop SSAX and create a sane >> and consistent XML library from scratch, maybe reusing some algorithms >> from SSAX, but that's a whole other story...) > > I can not see any reason why it should be necessary to split the Oleg > code. Someone who needs sxpath also needs sxml. Splitting the code > into different Chicken modules is pretty useless. > > I would like if Olegs SSAX code stays together in one big module. This > is the easiest way to do it.
In general it's better to partition into multiple modules where necessary. People who want everything can import everything, or even provide a wrapper module which imports then re-exports everything. In this case there are already multiple conceptual modules (ssax, sxpath, sxlst) which are not organized well. The procedure you want (sxml->xml) is not part of SSAX, nor even written by Oleg - it's part ofl Kirill Lisovsky's sxml-tools. -- Alex _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
