On 12/02/2018 3:50 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
In any case, I'm going to finish implementing dxml without any kind of DTD
support and then see how things go as far as the Phobos review process goes.
If dxml gets rejected, because the majority of folks think that we're better
off with std.xml (or no xml parser at all in Phobos) than one that doesn't
have DTD support, then oh well. That sucks, but anyone who wants dxml can
then use it as a 3rd party library. I think that the D community would be
worse off because of that, but it's not ultimately my decision to make, and
either way, I have the parser that I need.
We are definitely not better off with just std.xml currently.
The problem comes from the word currently. By going into Phobos even if
experimental, its going to be around for a while in some form or
another. So we need to invest a decent amount of time into not creating
more problems for new users expecting the world and not getting it.
If somebody (say a student?) were to write up a proper API and use dxml
as a basis for a simpler parser, now that could be a worth while project
and definitely could go into Phobos.
I may even consider doing it at some point in the future.