Alex Martelli wrote:
> Jeremy Bowers wrote:> ...> >>the choice of *last* resort, when you absolutely *need* easy parsing in>>multiple languages or environments and can't get it any other way. It is> > > I think this assertion, as it stands, is untenable. There just about> IS *some* other way -- e.g., inventing your own little language for> data description and writing from scratch the needed parsers in all> languages and environments of interest.
That's order N effort rather then constant effort, thus that's not easy
parsing in other environments, that's the virtually impossible job we
were faced with 10 years ago. (SGML wasn't all that easy either, from
what I gather.)
> Are you SERIOUSLY claiming that such reiterated reinventions of the> wheel -- which were a good part of the data interchange "state of the> art" before XML appeared -- should be used in preference to XML?!
No. This it rather negates the rest of your message, since it seems to
be based on my making that non-claim.