Re: [Boost-docs] The beauty of LATEX

Subject: Re: [Boost-docs] The beauty of LATEX
From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-10-22 10:17:55

On 10/22/2011 5:07 PM, Daniel James wrote:
> On 21 October 2011 21:23, Dave Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> on Fri Oct 21 2011, Daniel James <> wrote:
>>> That might be extended to say 'A programming language in a markup
>>> language is nonsense'. The problem is that in most languages things
>>> are symbols by default, in a markup language things are text by
>>> default, so using one as a programming language requires nearly
>>> everything to be annotated as 'not text' which becomes verbose.
>> I don't think that's really the problem. We have lots of examples of
>> programming languages in markup languages that work out pretty well, for
>> example, PHP and LaTeX. They're certainly not nonsense.
> 'Nonsense' was Joel's word, I don't think XSL is nonsense. As I said,
> "it's great for some XML transformations". On the right occasion it
> can even be elegant but on the wrong occasion.... Maybe icky would
> have been a more appropriate word.

My exact words: "A programming language in XML is nonesense!"
And I stand by it. There's just too much noise to be useful.
For that matter, no one should be coding in raw XML anyway.


Joel de Guzman

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : 2017-11-11 08:50:41 UTC