Reply to: Xsl

[AtW]

No answers then?

You are a bit too late bogey - couple of years ago, maybe even 1 year I'd get engaged into this pointless and long arguement be it XSL, columbian sausages, IR35, FTVs etc.

But I got wiser - I no longer care if my view is accepted by pretty much everyone, I have no goals to pursvuade (Fl33ty needed to correct spelling) anyone in that I am right.

I said all I wanted about XSL - those who have ears will hear.

[threaded]

No answers then?

Making a pizza and fries for tea.

[bogeyman]

Eat your pies threaded.

No answers then?

[AtW]

Eat your pies threaded.

[threaded]

I insist that XSLT is a piece of crock, and whoever designed it should be put to the wall for wasting grand opportunity.

But what exactly is wrong with it? The things you've mentioned so far I would say are positive advantages in many real world situations.

[mcquiggd]

And in the meantime, the world moves swiftly on....

[AtW]

I insist that XSLT is a piece of crock, and whoever designed it should be put to the wall for wasting grand opportunity.

[bogeyman]

XSLT is Turing complete - this is proven and used to claim that it can do pretty much anything other languages do. Sure it can but workarounds are totally dumb and stupid, mainly because there are no variables and no proper constructs that every programmer has got a God given right to expect from anything that is meant to process data.

My dear chap.

Why do you insist that XLST is a programming language, when clearly, as I and others here have told you it is not?

[AtW]

XSLT is Turing complete - this is proven and used to claim that it can do pretty much anything other languages do. Sure it can but workarounds are totally dumb and stupid, mainly because there are no variables and no proper constructs that every programmer has got a God given right to expect from anything that is meant to process data.

[bogeyman]

XSLT is Turing complete, but it means jack sh1t because it is the time and effort needed to do some simple tasks that's relevant, not stupid claim that it is Turing complete and therefore it can do anything other languages can - sure it can, but amount of extra effort and cost in performance is ridiculous.

Bulltulip!

XSLT isn't Turing complete -- but then what is?

XSLT IS NOT A GENRAL PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE !!!

XSLT IS A TRANSFORM OPERATOR !!!

If I shout that enough times, will you understand?

[Jabberwocky]

The more you post the more I am sure you know very little about what you are doing.

You are the typical self-taught programmer. You think you have figured it all out for yourself and that you know it all.

Every time you post about tech stuff, you expose a vast gap in your knowledge.

No, the vast gap is between his ears.

[AtW]

XSLT is Turing complete, but it means jack sh1t because it is the time and effort needed to do some simple tasks that's relevant, not stupid claim that it is Turing complete and therefore it can do anything other languages can - sure it can, but amount of extra effort and cost in performance is ridiculous.

[bogeyman]

I am a business school graduate...

Well you're not an Comp Sci grad that's for sure.

You seem to think XSL is some kind of magical language for working on XML files.

According to you, XSLT should be Turing complete and have loops and variables and conditionals.

Why?

If you design your data correctly in the first place, none of this is necessary.

Fecking amateurs!

BM

[mcquiggd]

good for you... now, where is my Rolls Royce Corniche, in white, less than 1k miles on the clock, with DVLA history and MOT certificate...?

[AtW]

I am a business school graduate...