Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Hi Norman,
> I expect you to spend zero time counting brackets -- that's what computers are for. Even vi can do bracket matching, and I imagine that most folk are using editors significantly more functional than that.
I am not a computer and still like (and need) to read code.
So in the code you provided:
>>> ;; The XSLT identity transformation
>>> (lx:namespace ((#f "http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform"))
>>> (stylesheet version: 1.0
>>> (template match: "node()|@*"
>>> (copy
>>> (apply-templates select: "@*|node()")))))
if I position the cursor after the third ending right bracket, I am
completely lost what is in scope/visible at that point.
This proposal gets a firm
-10
from me, and I am a typical developer, who must read and understand
code in his work every day.
I find that one of the good features of XSLT as compared to languages
using { and } as block delimiters, is that in XSLT one knows at a
glance where an <xsl:template> or an <xsl:function> or an
<xsl:variable> or an <xsl:choose> ends.
The proposal to change this to an unreadable ")))))))))))...))" will
lead to spending more and completely unwarranted, additional time in
doing my work. Such a feature is not productive and has negative
impact on the work of developers.
--
Cheers,
Dimitre Novatchev
---------------------------------------
Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence.
---------------------------------------
To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk
-------------------------------------
Never fight an inanimate object
-------------------------------------
You've achieved success in your field when you don't know whether what
you're doing is work or play
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Norman Gray <norman@a...> wrote:
>
> Dmitre, hello.
>
> On 2010 Dec 12, at 16:21, Dimitre Novatchev wrote:
>
>>> ;; The XSLT identity transformation
>>> (lx:namespace ((#f "http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform"))
>>> (stylesheet version: 1.0
>>> Â (template match: "node()|@*"
>>> Â Â (copy
>>> Â Â Â (apply-templates select: "@*|node()")))))
>>>
>>> This would be hideous for document-centric markup, but is excellent for those cases -- XSLT is a fine example -- where there's more markup than text. Â It becomes valuable simply because you can see more of the content on the screen at once.
>
> [...]
>
>> The only thing that is seen at once is the large number of closing
>> brackets and that it is impossible to say if this is syntactically
>> correct at all (how much time should I spend counting  left and right
>> brakets?
>
> I expect you to spend zero time counting brackets -- that's what computers are for. Â Even vi can do bracket matching, and I imagine that most folk are using editors significantly more functional than that.
>
> I'm not suggesting this as a NextXML syntax -- simply that the discussion in this subthread seemed to have drifted towards compact syntaxes, and it seemed time for another outing for Lx. Â Also, one of the motivations for the perennial suggestions of compact syntaxes (and I think the only good one) is that they're easier to read. Â This is one reason why people enthuse about Relax, and no-one ever gets excited by XSchema.
>
> [XML's wonderful, and all that; but readable? Â Urgh -- only with a debugging hat on.]
>
> I agree that </> isn't worth bothering with.
>
> All the best,
>
> Norman
>
>
> --
> Norman Gray  :  http://nxg.me.uk
>
>
>
>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
