Jonathan Cast wrote: > > NB: This example is *precisely* why I will never adopt MathML as an > authoring format. Bowing and scraping at the alter of W3C is not worth > using such a terrible syntax, not ever. > > (Indented, that's > > <math> > <mrow> > <msup> > <mi>x</mi> > <mn>2</mn> > </msup> > <mo>+</mo> > <mrow> > <mn>4</mn> > <mo>⁢</mo> > <mi>x</mi> > </mrow> > <mo>+</mo> > <mn>4</mn> > </mrow> > </math> > > Which is still unforgivably horrible. I *think* it's trying to say $x^2 > + 4x + 4$, but I'm not confident even of that.
Yeah, MathML looks like a machine-only format to me, begging the question why they don't use a more compact format. > I'm also unconvinced > it's actually easier to parse than $x^2 + 4x + 4$.) While parsing is a solved problem in theory, a lot of people use some regular expression kludges or similar atrocities in practice. Writing a proper parser is too complicated if your language doesn't have parser combinators. :) Regards, apfelmus -- http://apfelmus.nfshost.com _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe