Joern Nettingsmeier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>other people might propose XML. then it becomes to a question whether > >>alsa-lib should rely on other libs... > > > > > > I think that XML is too overkill for our purposes. > > true if you only consider alsa. but on most systems, libxml2 is there > anyway. <underwear type="asbestos">and imvho xml is less a matter of > taste than lisp.</underwear> and xml is way easier to handle in other > contexts (i'm thinking of auto.configuration stuff etc.) > otoh, the embedded guys will probably not like it, but then memory is > becoming cheaper by the minute, and its additional size will be a moot > point in the very near future.
IMO, xml is a piece of bloated, error-prone hypeware. Comparing it to LISP doesn't make sense at all. LISP is a programming language, whereas XML is a markup language, albeit one that has come to be misused a great deal. -- Måns Rullgård [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: INetU Attention Web Developers & Consultants: Become An INetU Hosting Partner. Refer Dedicated Servers. We Manage Them. You Get 10% Monthly Commission! INetU Dedicated Managed Hosting http://www.inetu.net/partner/index.php _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-devel
