Till Mossakowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Could someone summarize the pros and cons of
> HXT versus HaXml versus HSX?
>From my perspective (therefore perhaps important but hardly
comprehensive), HXT vs HaXml:
HXT provides arrows. The con is you have to learn arrows. The pro is
the arrows
Hi Lucius,
my Haskell Source eXtensions [1] (which Neil suggested earlier)
supports expressions, values and pattern matching as language
constructs, but not types.
WASH [2] supports expressions, values and (to a limited extent) types,
but not pattern matching.
XHaskell [3] has the support neces
Till,i was looking for an OCamlDuce-like solution. The point there is that the support is at the language level -- not library level. OCamlDuce has language constructs -- values, type and pattern-matching specifically aimed at XML processing. Thus, the OCamlDuce compiler catches many misuses, error
There is also the Haskell XML Toolbox (HXT)
http://www.fh-wedel.de/~si/HXmlToolbox/
and HaXml
http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/fp/HaXml/
Could someone summarize the pros and cons of
HXT versus HaXml versus HSX?
Greetings,
Till
Neil Mitchell schrieb:
> Hi Greg,
>
> I've been using Haskell Source eXte
Hi Greg,
I've been using Haskell Source eXtensions which seems to have as much
XML language support as you could ever possibly need :)
http://www.cs.chalmers.se/~d00nibro/haskell-src-exts/
Thanks
Neil
On 8/29/06, Lucius Meredith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
All,
Apologies if this question has
Johannes Waldmann wrote:
I am looking at the Haskell XML RPC library http://www.haskell.org/haxr/
First of all, this is a very nice thing to have, and installation is
really easy, using Cabal and the packaged source archives.
Hi Johannes,
I'm the maintainer of HaXR, and I'll try to answer you
