Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Dare Obasanjo wrote: >> Exactly, that's why as a programmer I'd rather stick with the >> language I'm doing most of the application development with anyway >> (i.e. C#, Javascript, etc) as opposed to dealing with the [familiar] >> complexity of that language plus all the idiosyncracies of XQuery & >> XML Schema as well. To which I responded: Hi Dare, For the examples I've compared, I wind up writing about 4 times as much code using that approach, and it definitely takes more time to write and maintain that code. Then Dare Obasanjo wrote: > Can you give me the input XML and expected output so I can see > whether XQuery really takes 4 times less code than E4X or C-Omega? In > fact, I have an article due this month and that would be an > interesting topic to cover. Well, I said compared to C#, Javascript, etc. The specific examples that I have compared use SAX or DOM to process either pure XML or to create XML structures from relational databases. Your response indicates that I was talking about E4X or C-Omega - I wasn't. I don't know E4X. C-Omega makes sense to me, but I wonder if it has an Ada problem. Jonathan
|
