Re: RFC: XML::Composer

In short, there is a very specific design philosophy here and I wouldn't recommend it for those who don't have test suites, but it makes coding very fast

Maybe the coding is faster, but what about debugging, especially in the case of bad xml? If your goal is to make it easier to generate XML quickly, perhaps a wrapper to lessen the book-keeping code on one of the existing modules might be a better approach.

Comment on Re: RFC: XML::Composer

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: RFC: XML::Composer by Ovid (Cardinal) on Sep 30, 2005 at 22:20 UTC
The wrapper doesn't work. There are many companies that routinely generate and use XML that is not well-formed. While it's terrible to have to work with this, most existing XML modules don't play with with poorly formed XML (as well they shouldn't). Also, debugging is a snap. Unlike the existing modules, the interface is very transparent. You get exactly what you ask for. Cheers, Ovid New address of my CGI Course.	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^2: RFC: XML::Composer
by Ovid (Cardinal) on Sep 30, 2005 at 22:20 UTC

The wrapper doesn't work. There are many companies that routinely generate and use XML that is not well-formed. While it's terrible to have to work with this, most existing XML modules don't play with with poorly formed XML (as well they shouldn't).

Also, debugging is a snap. Unlike the existing modules, the interface is very transparent. You get exactly what you ask for.

Cheers,
Ovid

New address of my CGI Course.

[reply]