Re: [xslt] Any interest in an alternative syntax for XSLT?
- From: Phil Shafer <phil juniper net>
- To: veillard redhat com
- Cc: The Gnome XSLT library mailing-list <xslt gnome org>
- Subject: Re: [xslt] Any interest in an alternative syntax for XSLT?
- Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 14:56:04 -0400
Daniel Veillard writes:
> Okay, that looks small, but using yacc is a problem, especially for code
>in a library (not all bison/yacc allow to link twice code generated, barring
>other code from using it, can be a serious problem), plus in general I
>don't trust yacc to work well with unicode, and you need full unicode support
>when dealing with XSLT.
I use bison and "%pure_parser", so linking shouldn't be an issue.
>So independantly of the syntax that would be
>a problem. I assume SLAX should handle the same ranges of characters (and
>encoding) as the underlying XML model and implementation, right ?
I don't handle unicode, but this is my fault, not bison's. Bison
will traffic whatever YYSTYPE you define. slax uses a structure
for YYSTYPE, which includes a pointer to the string. I need to
check with the character encoding scheme as I build these strings.
I don't do this currently, but will fix it.
] [Thread Prev