Re: Help Needed

Well, there are cases where it isn't appropriate. Basic technical reasons
could include:

1) Unavailability of a suitable XML parser, I sure won't write my own.

2) Requirement to avoid excess external dependencies.

3) Speed. For example it is not a good idea to configure a CGI using XML in
general.

4) Maximum simplicity, there are simply times when end users may have to
edit a configuration and if you can make it DIRT simple, that will be easier
for them. They usually don't know the rules of XML syntax and you don't want
to have to explain it. Most people can grok an INI/properties file.

5) Compatibility with existing software or existing processes.

Those are all quite valid reasons not to use an XML configuration file.

OTOH I agree with you that someone who avoids using XML just because they
think it is 'icky' somehow, even when it would be the best technical choice,
are just bad engineers.



>> No! Let's!
>>
>> I think the issue is largely that XML is pretty bad as a configuration
>> syntax, but the alternatives are at best just as bad. It's donkeys all
>> the way down. Configuration is overrated anyway, if it worked on the
>> developer's computer there's no reason other can't use the same setup.
>>
>>
Hmmm. Yeah, well, any non-trivial piece of software is likely to require a
configuration file for any of 100's of reasons. I doubt you meant this
seriously, but I certainly would find it hard to employ an engineer that
thought hard coding file paths into an application was a superior solution
because "Configuration is overrated", lol.

-- 
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself.
Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.

_______________________________________________
Perl-XML mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe: http://listserv.ActiveState.com/mailman/mysubs