Perl? Maintainability? Nah. Having maintained a Perl package of 20000 lines
for Source Code config mgt (no C or other bits involved), I would have to
disagree. I don't see XSLT doing the same job. Don't talk to me about CPAN
and module hell - that's just a swamp of random code and has nothing to do
with maintainablity.
As for Purpose, Perl "is a language for getting your job done" (perl 5, ed
2). Just which job is that then? Text processing seems to be a minor part
of it's scope. Maybe "scope" is one of the differences - the Perl/Python
scope of action is that much larger.
The most obvious diff is that XSLT has tags but Python/Perl hasn't. I
suspect if you tried to write a SCCM system in XSLT, I wouldn't rate yr
chances for understandability, or even of surviving very long as a sane
person.
David Tolpin
<dvd(_at_)davidashen(_dot_)net> To:
xsl-list(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com
Sent by: cc:
owner-xsl-list(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulbe Subject:
Re: [xsl] XSLT vs Perl
rrytech.com
03/02/2004 13:11
Please respond to xsl-list
Xslt has been designed as a language with a purpose;
It was designed as a language with a purpose.
perl has neither of these attributes, hence perl's chaotic nature and
unmaintainabilty.
Same about perl and almost the same purpose. What about maintainability,
look at CPAN. Can XSLT dream about this volume of maintainable and usable
code?
But I
think, as well, it's a matter of apples and pears. An XSLT application
would, IMO, also include Java or some other language. Perl fills in any
gap
it can gets it's paws on,
A perl application typically includes code written in C, Java and other
languages, if needed.
but I'd rather use python if push came to shove.
What's the difference between Python and XSLT 2.0?
David Tolpin
http://davidashen.net/
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list