Once upon a time Perrin Harkins shaped the electrons to say...
> > my only concrete reason for preferring xml, other than that
> > it "feels" right ;), is that you get much better error
> > handling right out of the box, especially when you turn on
> > validation. that's something that would have to be
> > implemented as part of a perl-based config file processor.
>
> Can't you just do something like a require() wrapped in an eval{}?
And then try finding the errors. That's a cheap perl idiomatic way out.
If one of the goals of this group is to provide a standard API to
an alternative to Java and J2EE in the "Enterprise" arena, then please
don't use a nested data structure perl based config file. XML is a
standard that was built to do things just like this. Don't throw it away.
-D
--
C combines the power of assembly language with the readability of assembly language.
