Re: Is c++ only better c ?
On Oct 27, 7:28 pm, Juha Nieminen <nos...@thanks.invalid> wrote:
Won't someone think of the compiler writers???
(As a side note, I detest XML precisely because of that: XML
has been designed to make it easier to create programs which
read XML, at the cost of making it harder for users to write
It's not quite the same context. While XML is not without its
problems, one of the goals is to allow non-programmers to design
their own language, more or less easily. And because all of
such languages have the same basic grammar, they can all be
based on the same parser, and can all benefit from the same
smart editor tools.
(Basically XML is pre-tokenized data, which lifts the need for
the program reading XML to tokenize it.) This is the complete
reversals of what software should be all about: Software
should do as much as possible to make the life of the user as
easy as possible, not the other way around!
In the case of XML, it is the user who defines the language.
As an example of what I'm talking about, consider MathML vs.
LaTeX equations, and which one is easier for a human to
Neither are, IMHO, particularly simple. MathML will benefit
from an XML aware editor; LaTeX will need special support. In
the case of LaTeX, of course, the language has been around
awhile, and is pretty universal in mathematic circles, so
editors already have that support. The simplest way to use
MathML is probablly to write LaTeX, and pass it through a
converter. But XML is used for many other things, where there
really aren't good existing tools.
James Kanze (GABI Software) email:email@example.com
Conseils en informatique orient=E9e objet/
Beratung in objektorientierter Datenverarbeitung
9 place S=E9mard, 78210 St.-Cyr-l'=C9cole, France, +33 (0)1 30 23 00 34