Re: L4X

[Javier Guerra Giraldez <javier@...>]

On Tuesday 08 January 2008, Fabien wrote:
> Scala does a very decent job of using such approaches for XML, and
> integrating them into a 'normal' (i.e. procedural OO flavored) language.
> You can get the whole picture of Scala manipulation of XML here:
>
> http://lamp.epfl.ch/~emir/projects/scalaxbook/scalaxbook.docbk.html

after a (very) quick glance, it seems very similar to E4X; enhancing the 
syntax of the language to make XML a new type, and using field-like accessors 
for the XML nodes.

can be an interesting project; but the only obvious advantage seems to remove 
the quotes around XML constants... how often do you need XML constants in the 
code?

the other posibility that i see is using metalua's pattern match to handle xml 
itself.  but wouldn't that be at compile time? can metalua match at runtime?

also, you mention that there's no point in replacing LuaExpat; does that mean 
that metalua's pattern matching can 'match' patterns in the parsed structure 
and not only on strings?  that sounds promising, but somewhat removed from 
metalua's original purpose as a compiler extension.

-- 
Javier

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.