Sometimes I feel that good old .ini files with an API to read/write is much more readable and parseable than the XML, at least for configuration. I can appreciate the hierarchical nature of XML, but for configuration it is quite frequently an overkill.
On 10 April 2014 17:26, Stephen Price <[email protected]> wrote: > Ooops. I seem to have stumbled into the wrong room. This is the > ozMedicalComplications list, right? > > ;) > > > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Greg Keogh <[email protected]> wrote: > >> If there is one technology that drives me nuts every time I have to work >>> with it, it's XML, XPATH and associated crapping XML Namespaces. >>> Why does everything have to be so bloody painful. >>> >> >> XML isn't as painful as most other current technologies, it's like a >> paper cut with lemon juice spilt on it. Whereas trying to overcome security >> barriers is like having a kidney stone, or trying to get a fresh checkout >> of your solution to build is like a migraine, or trying to write a html5 >> app is like a spinal prolapse. >> >> Linq to XML avoids XPATH, but whenever I have to got back to the old XML >> model I have to lookup the XPATH syntax and how to add a namespace. >> Albihari's C# nutshell book has a couple of pages of "reminders" on old XML >> tricks which save a lot of time. >> >> Greg K >> > >
