[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: L4X
- From: Javier Guerra Giraldez <javier@...>
- Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 23:22:09 -0500
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:
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
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.
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.