But perhaps this discussion should stay away from pin-point
implementations of this and that and remain focussed on major
qualities, such as the ones on which Liam has remarked.
If a programming language has the graviational force of attracting a
community to contribute and remain contributing: this is "true grit"
;-)
-W
On 30/06/2013, Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang(_dot_)laun(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
On 30/06/2013, Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
Maybe a little off-topic, but years ago I created in XSLT 2.0 a
general LR-1 parser (run-time ) tool, that is table-directed.
I hope that this could help conclude the discussion whether or not
XSLT is good for string processing -- if one can easily develop a
parser for any deterministic CF language (which is the case), then we
have a firm, positive answer.
If the parser (as they usually do) exercises a pass over the input
string: where is the intensive (!) text processing by which to judge
whatever?
My idea of text processing is a little advanced, perhaps. What about a
full implementation of m4 ;-) ?
Cheers
Wolfgang
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--