• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: XPath 2.0 - how much of XQuery should it include?
• From: Bill de hÓra <dehora@e...>
• Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 13:17:37 +0100
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <1091561421936.20020510113450@j...>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeni Tennison [mailto:jeni@j...] 
>
> Actually I did study Lisp as part of my AI studies (though a 
> while ago now), so I do understand how elegant it is. I 
> wasn't making a dig at Lisp at all, and I'm sorry if it came 
> across that way and made you feel irked. 

Not at all; IANA Lisp bigot, more of an admirer (I do think it's a very
good language to look at when you're designing other languages tho').
I'm more irked by the fact you and others have to go through the hoops
with XSLT/Xpath to get to where we were with another language decades
ago. It's something I don't get about this industry.


> I was trying to make 
> the point that XPath isn't used in the same way as Lisp, 
> because it works inside another language, so it shouldn't 
> have all of the same functionality as Lisp. 

Fair point, and one I hadn't considered.

 
> I'm arguing that it's better to have 10 functions operating 
> on 1 data structure than to have 20 functions operating on 1 
> data structure. 

Good one :)

Bill de hÓra

• References:
  • Re: XPath 2.0 - how much of XQuery should it include?
    • From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@j...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XPath 2.0 - how much of XQuery should it include?
• Next by Date: Re: PSVI formalization
• Previous by thread: Re: XPath 2.0 - how much of XQuery should it include?
• Next by thread: Re: XPath 2.0 - how much of XQuery should it include?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread