Re: RFC: XML::Composer


good chemistry is complicated, and a little bit messy -LW
	PerlMonks

Re: RFC: XML::Composer

by Zaxo (Archbishop)

on Oct 01, 2005 at 01:42 UTC ( [id://496580]=note: print w/replies, xml )

Need Help??

in reply to RFC: XML::Composer

How about calling it XML::Composter?

Garbage in, garbage out!

After Compline,
Zaxo

Comment on Re: RFC: XML::Composer

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^2: RFC: XML::Composer
by Aristotle (Chancellor) on Oct 01, 2005 at 09:39 UTC

Bwahahaha! Brilliant. This deserves more than the one ++ I can give.

Makeshifts last the longest.

[reply]

Re^2: RFC: XML::Composer
by Jenda (Abbot) on Oct 03, 2005 at 14:15 UTC

You should go talk to a gardener. Garbage in, garbage out? More like Garbage in, good natural fertilizer out. So I don't think "Composter" is the right term. Also ... I don't think the "XML::Awful" is a good name. That's unnecessary duplication. "XML" eq "Awfull".

Jenda
XML sucks. Badly. SOAP on the other hand is the most powerfull vacuum pump ever invented.

[reply]

In Section Meditations