Re: Scripting in Gnome

On Thu, 2004-02-05 at 20:16, jamie wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-02-05 at 18:45, Sean Middleditch wrote:
> > Why would XML work better than IDL?  IDL could just be compiled to
> stubs
> > that use D-BUS.  The "oh, it's XML, so it's just going to be easier
> and
> > better" rehashing is getting old.  Especially given detailed claims to
> > the contrary by others in this thread.
> Whether you use XSLT or a built in xml parser, its quicker to develop a
> programme to read in and process xml than plain text - okay? Im fed up
> repeating this but seeing as you are exceptionally abrasive I thought I
> better say it once more in the hope of getting my message across. XML
> can also be validated against a schema/dtd and thats handy too for
> debugging whether your produced IDL is correct etc.

This argument might have carried some weight if the limiting factor in
producing language bindings was the effort of writing the IDL parser for
that language. It is not, because parsing IDL is only a very small part
of what is involved in writing language bindings, so it's not worth
deviating from the established standard of CORBA IDL over.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]