Re: XML and XSLT Praise

>>>>> "Peter" == Peter Gummer <p-gummer-bzGI/[email protected]> writes:

    Peter> file via a File Save dialog, and the XML DOM was built and

It's not a DOM. It's an object oriented XML tree structure. The DOM is
ghastly.

    Peter> classes. Having done a similar job recently with the .NET
    Peter> XSLT classes, I have to say the .NET classes are easier to
    Peter> use. This is partly because the .NET documentation has
    Peter> better simple examples, but also because Gobo's XSLT
    Peter> requires more code to achieve the same result. But I was

I don't know the .NET XSLT classes.
It would be quite possible to add some simplification classes for
common tasks - Neal Lester did this once for STRING to STRING
transformations.

    Peter> happy with the end result, except for one thing: as soon as
    Peter> I added the first reference to a Gobo XSLT class and hit
    Peter> F7, EiffelStudio went away for several minutes and sucked
    Peter> in a huge number of new classes. The build time for a
    Peter> finalized build tripled, and the size of the finalized
    Peter> executable blew out from 7 MB to 17 MB. Twenty lines of
    Peter> code costing 10 MB! This is almost as bad as EiffelCOM! I
    Peter> guess the convenience of having a full-blown XSLT
    Peter> interpreter inside my application comes at a big cost.

Note that this is XSLT 2.0 (not 1.0 as implemented in .NET). This is a
much bigger (and more powerful, and more friendly) language. This is
where the cost comes in. In particular, Unicode normalization is
responsible for much of the increase in code size.
-- 
Colin Adams
Preston Lancashire