Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
Luca Morandini wrote:
Nevertheless, it is easier to build a tool around a declarative
language expressed as XML, than a procedural language expressed as...
a procedural programming language.
I'm sorry, Luca, but I think that's BS.
<cut/>
For example, do you think that if the java classes were expressed as XML
statements that *declarative* describe their methods and variables and
inner classes it would be easier to write a tool like Eclipse?
That I don't know, I've never seen the inner workings of Eclipse.
Let's just say that when something is written in XML (say, an UML model
expressed as XMI) I can fire up Xalan and beat the beast into submission
easily, if the same mopel was expressed as a set of Java classes...
hmmm... time for "man yacc" ?
Maybe it's just that I've worked with XML for too long, but I still like
the easy production/validation/transformation of vocabularies that comes
with it, and I'm scared a bit by the other approach.
Regards,
--------------------
Luca Morandini
www.lucamorandini.it
--------------------
