On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 08:27:43AM +0200, Wolfgang Laun scripsit:
On 26/06/2013, Graydon <graydon(_at_)marost(_dot_)ca> wrote:
If you're going to do a lot of whatever it is, XSLT 2 is nearly ideal;
you get your escaping for free, you can deal with the
never-to-be-sufficiently accursed quoted commas by tokenizing on "?,"?
after tokenizing on the newlines, the unparsed-text functions are very
handy things, matches, replace, and xsl:analyze-string really can do
about everything you'd want.
I realize it isn't a traditional way to think of XSLT, but, really, 2.0
is very nearly as good as perl for pure string handling tasks. _And_ it
won't let you commit some sin of omission with your character encoding.
It would be a *very* interesting experiment to write this in XSLT 2.0
(you) and in Perl 5 (me), exchange, test and compare ;-)
While I agree that would be an interesting experiment, I'm not sure
we've got an adequate specification.
Especially the parts about "comprehensibility" and "maintainability". :)
-- Graydon
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--