On Wed, 2008-11-05 at 10:55 +0100, Paul Libbrecht wrote: > Jelly is still unbeatable as a glue in xml processing.
I think that is a conjecture, a claim even, that needs justification and support. Groovy, Python, Ruby people would argue (and I think quite rightly) that XML is a data specification notation that has no computational model, and shouldn't have. Groovy, Python and Ruby have all the computational model and XML processing features needed -- or if they don't they should have. > What took James from Jelly, I think, is Groovy but that is > incomparable... data in groovy is just as ugly as data in java while > data in jelly is kind of natural and mixing data and scripting is > exactly where jelly is at glory. Lisp is probably what you really want :-) -- Russel. ==================================================== Dr Russel Winder Partner Concertant LLP t: +44 20 7585 2200, +44 20 7193 9203 41 Buckmaster Road, f: +44 8700 516 084 London SW11 1EN, UK. m: +44 7770 465 077
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
