On 2/6/11 8:32 PM, spir wrote:
When does one need to write by hand, in source, structured data needing
to be serialised into XML (or any other format)? In my (admittedly very
limited), such data always are outputs of some processing (if only
reading from other file).
denis
If you have a
On 02/08/2011 07:44 PM, Ary Manzana wrote:
On 2/6/11 8:32 PM, spir wrote:
When does one need to write by hand, in source, structured data needing
to be serialised into XML (or any other format)? In my (admittedly very
limited), such data always are outputs of some processing (if only
reading
On Wed, 2011-02-09 at 00:16 -0600, Christopher Nicholson-Sauls wrote:
[ . . . ]
xml.book(...) as sugar for xml.tag(book,...) make it xml.bookTag(...)
using xml.bookTag would ruin it for me. I'd use something that allowed
just book, xml.book is already not enough of a DSL.
--
Russel.
I am coming in half way through a thread, apologies if I am saying
something that has already been said or is not relevant.
On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 22:59 +0100, Rainer Schuetze wrote:
Tomek Sowiński wrote:
auto xml = xmlWriter(outputRange);
xml.comment(books.length, favorite books of
A couple of other random thoughts regarding XML:
1. Groovy has XMLSlurper which is an surprisingly fast way of reading
XML and processing it as needed. It was developed for fast
SAX-underneath, document-based but not-W3C-DOM processing of
multi-Gigabyte XML documents.
While I'm circling the problem of parsing, I took a quick look at writing not
to get stuck in analysis-paralysis. Writing XML is pretty independent from
parsing and an order of magnitude easier to solve. It was perfect to get myself
coding.
These are the guidelines I followed:
* Memory
On 2011-02-06 15:43, Tomek Sowiński wrote:
While I'm circling the problem of parsing, I took a quick look at writing not
to get stuck in analysis-paralysis. Writing XML is pretty independent from
parsing and an order of magnitude easier to solve. It was perfect to get myself
coding
On 2/6/11 9:43 AM, Tomek Sowiński wrote:
While I'm circling the problem of parsing, I took a quick look at writing not
to get stuck in analysis-paralysis.
That's great. I won't be able to add much because I haven't worked with
XML so I don't know what people need. The example looks nice and
Tomek Sowiński wrote:
auto xml = xmlWriter(outputRange);
xml.comment(books.length, favorite books of mine.);
foreach (book; books) {
xml.book(year, book.year, {
foreach (author; book.authors) {
xml.tight.authorName({
xml.first(author.first);
On Sunday 06 February 2011 13:59:19 Rainer Schuetze wrote:
Tomek Sowiński wrote:
auto xml = xmlWriter(outputRange);
xml.comment(books.length, favorite books of mine.);
foreach (book; books) {
xml.book(year, book.year, {
foreach (author; book.authors) {
On 02/06/2011 10:59 PM, Rainer Schuetze wrote:
This looks nice and compact Using opDispatch to specify the tag (I guess that
is what you are using to create a tag book by calling xml.book()) feels like
misusing opDispatch, though. Does it add readability in contrast to passing the
tag as a
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 12:23:45AM +0100, spir wrote:
How do you write a tag named tight? Or a tag calculated at runtime?
Call opDispatch directly ;-)
You can't call opDispatch with a runtime string; it needs to be a template
parameter.
The way I do it is:
string createNode(string name) {
On 02/06/2011 03:43 PM, Tomek Sowiński wrote:
While I'm circling the problem of parsing, I took a quick look at writing not
to get stuck in analysis-paralysis. Writing XML is pretty independent from
parsing and an order of magnitude easier to solve. It was perfect to get myself
coding
Rainer Schuetze napisał:
This looks nice and compact Using opDispatch to specify the tag (I guess
that is what you are using to create a tag book by calling xml.book())
feels like misusing opDispatch, though. Does it add readability in
contrast to passing the tag as a string to some
14 matches
Mail list logo
