Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...> writes: > Ken MacLeod wrote: > > Coincidentally, this is one of the major feature differences with > > Perl SAX (being descussed in the "SAX Comments" thread). Perl SAX > > has always used a node as the argument to SAX events. In our > > case, though, it's not a "start element" or "end element" object, > > but just an element node, a DOM node, to be exact. > > > > For SAX2's namespaces, all that needed adding was Prefix, > > LocalName, and NamespaceURI properties to the nodes. > > That's interesting (and proves me that I shouldn't be that Java > biased) especially after the comment from Elliotte Rusty Harold > about the added complexity of such an architecture. > > What's your feeling after having implemented and used it ? It's either the difference between strongly and weakly typed languages or an as-yet-unrecognized difference in design pattern, but the marriage of SAX and DOM in Perl, using Perl style APIs, results in fewer classes/interfaces than in just SAX alone in Java. The same patterns work very well in Python and Tcl, and even C, but are having troubles being ported back to Java/C++. As we move more code into this framework, we've found the resulting code to be quite a bit simpler overall. -- Ken
|
