On 12/02/2018 3:59 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
If std.xml currently does not support DTDs, then I say dxml is
definitely a Phobos candidate.  At the very least, it does not make the
current situation worse.  Rejecting dxml because it doesn't support DTDs
is basically letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, which is
something this community has been plagued with for far too long.  What's
worse: a std.dxml that doesn't support DTDs, or a std.xml with
fundamental problems that continue to plague us for the next decade
while nobody else steps up to implement a suitable replacement?


dxml 7.5k LOC
std.xml 3k LOC

dxml would make the situation a lot worse.
          • Re:... Patrick Schluter via Digitalmars-d-announce
          • Re:... Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-announce
          • Re:... H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-announce
          • Re:... Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-announce
          • Re:... Kagamin via Digitalmars-d-announce
          • Re:... H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-announce
          • Re:... Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-announce
          • Re:... Patrick Schluter via Digitalmars-d-announce
          • Re:... Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-announce
          • Re:... Chris via Digitalmars-d-announce
    • Re: dxml 0.2.0 ... rikki cattermole via Digitalmars-d-announce
      • Re: dxml 0.... Chris via Digitalmars-d-announce
        • Re: dxm... Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d-announce
          • Re:... Chris via Digitalmars-d-announce
          • Re:... Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d-announce
      • Re: dxml 0.... Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) via Digitalmars-d-announce
        • Re: dxm... Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-announce
        • Re: dxm... Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) via Digitalmars-d-announce
        • Re: dxm... Kagamin via Digitalmars-d-announce
  • Re: dxml 0.2.0 relea... Chris via Digitalmars-d-announce

Reply via email to