On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 1:04 PM, David Carlisle
<davidc(_at_)nag(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk> wrote:
On 01/05/2012 12:49, Costello, Roger L. wrote:
Hi Folks,
I will take the following as an axiom:
Programs written to process XML should be implemented in XSLT.
An XSLT processor is a program that processes XML.
Therefore an XSLT processor should be implemented in XSLT. (As an
analogy, many C compilers are implemented in C.)
However, there are no XSLT processors implemented in XSLT.
Instead, XSLT processors are implemented in languages such as Java.
The implication of this state of affairs is this: "For real, manly XML
processing don't use XSLT; instead, use Java."
The entire argument appears spurious, so it seems fruitless to try to argue
specific points.
Why would anyone even try to do this, even if it were possible, it would be
vast amounts of work and would just produce an xslt engine that is slower
than the one you started with.
I think you a being a little harsh.
On that criterium, one could equally ask why bother trying to write a
compiler in anything other than C (or Assembler).
Possible answer(s)
Research? What you might learn along the way, you may not get a useful
processor but there would probably some intellectually useful end
result. Perhaps you would learn about some hitherto unknown limitation
or generate some other useful by-product.
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail: <mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--