xml in Ruby
--- Chad Fowler <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Chris Morris wrote:
> # paul vudmaska wrote:
> # >for my third cent, the above syntax 'just makes
> # >to me. What could be more semantic than
> # >without resorting to write your own
> # >for it? What's wrong with that being a
> # >data acess fascility? call me crazy
> # >
> # The point of contention seems to be whether or not
> this is included in
> # the core language vs. a library, right? How does
> the Ruby community as a
> # whole benefit from core inclusion? What's not
> satisfying to you about
> # this solution being contained in a library?
> One point I think the OP is also missing is that
> Erik's solution *is*
> implemented as a library and not as a modification
> to Ruby's syntax. So,
> in essence, you've already got what you want without
> hacking up the
This is true!
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
|All times are GMT. The time now is 09:19 AM.|
Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.