James, please be careful when you use phrases like this:
On 2/8/03 10:53 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Jelly on the other hand is more of a modular and general tool for turning
> XML into some kind of scripts - so I guess its a tool for making functional
> XML languages.
Jelly, at least in the mid-December snapshot with which I've been working,
is by no means a functional programming model. I tried to start a thread
back then about the small changes that would enable true functional
programming, but it died from lack of enthusiasm (and I got too busy to
pursue it).
Personally, I'd love to see Jelly present a functional model, since I think
it would make many things much easier to program (from the perspective of
the TagLibrary builder).
Anyway, I'm asking that you be careful saying "functional" because
semantics-and-compilers geeks like me will take that to mean something very
specific that is unfortunately not accurate.
BTW I'd be happy to re-open the functional-model discussion, now that I have
a few more cycles to spare.
.T.
--
War is NOT a necessity!
http://UnitedForPeace.org/ http://MoveOn.org/
http://NotInOurName.net/ http://CWG.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
