http://qs1969.pair.com?node_id=287651


in reply to Re: xml parsers: do I need one?
in thread xml parsers: do I need one?

I did some thinking, and decided:
-speed was NOT essential, as this could really be done via a cron job that runs once in a while
-The xml should not change (we've all heard that one!), but we both know that it will
-xml parsing is far more flexible than regex
-regex is far faster in this case
-xml parsing is both cooler, and the Right Thing to do

I will use a parser, I don't know which one, or how to pick it, but since I have experience using java's DOM parser, I'll probably stick with xml::dom

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: xml parsers: do I need one?
by mirod (Canon) on Aug 29, 2003 at 15:47 UTC
    since I have experience using java's DOM parser, I'll probably stick with xml::dom

    Please DON'T!

    XML::DOM is an old and barely maintained module. XML::LibXML implements the DOM, plus XPath, which makes it a LOT easier (and safer) to use. It drives me crazy to see the number of people still choosing to use it now, when better alternatives are clearly available.

    <rant mode="on">The fact that a module has the name of a standard does not mean a thing. More exactly, it just means that the author was the first one to write a module implementing some of the standard. It does not mean that it is a good module, that you should use it, or that there isn't a better module available. Use your brain! </rant>

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom