[Xcb] Hello xcblist.

[Peter Harris]

On 2010-02-05 01:53, Thomas Heller wrote:
> The biggest problem i had with the python generator was, that it was
> written in python ... I can't read that language very well.

If you think python is bad... the libxcb generator used to be written in
XSLT.

> As for now I don't really know if it is easier to write different
> output generators with my parser or with your python scripts. I would
> like to hear some opinions to that.

I started using Perl with XML::Twig back during the XSLT days. It was
demonstrably far more productive (for me) than trying to use XSLT. A
comparison with python would likely be less clear, but I suspect Perl
would still win (for me).

That's the great thing about XML: there's an XML parser for the language
of your choice. If you like Python, great. If not, it's no big loss. The
little bit of Python that is easily shared amongst generators doesn't
take that long to re-implement in your preferred language, and then the
hard part (actually generating what you wanted to generate) proceeds
much more quickly.

Peter Harris
-- 
               Open Text Connectivity Solutions Group
Peter Harris                    http://connectivity.opentext.com/
Research and Development        Phone: +1 905 762 6001
pharris at opentext.com            Toll Free: 1 877 359 4866