in reply to Re: XML element replacement
in thread XML element replacement

Curious - the poster started out by saying that he had a really hard time installing libXML or somesuch. I just tried an install of XML::Simple, and guess what? unresolved prerequisites, no good.

I hear the most XML libraries are out of control. Java-itis, bulky, over-engineered, to difficult interfaces. I haven't tried the Perl version, but hey, guess I won't be trying XML::Simple tonight, either.

I have a need for a simple XML parse myself. A known set of tags, the same every time. Treating it like text may be an adequately grungy thing to do. It looks to me like the guy has some training, and isn't that great at Perl. Hey, like me! I like this guy.

I never did like police.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: XML element replacement
by mirod (Canon) on Apr 29, 2006 at 07:43 UTC

    I have no problem with people who know what they are doing using regexps on consenting XML, within the privacy of their own job. If they really know what they are doing, all will be well. If they don't, then they've brought it upon themselves, they have to deal with it. I just have problems with people posting that kind of code, as it will lead people who really don't know what they're doing to think that this is a proper way to deal with XML. This would be indecent exposure if I may push the analogy a little too far ;--)

    BTW, if you can't install libxml2 (on which XML::LibXML is based), then try an expat based module, preferably XML::Twig of course ;--) On Windows, XML::Parser comes pre-installed with Activestate Perl. On any sensible platform that includes a compiler, both expat and libxml2 should install easily. XML libraries are generally not over-engineered, it's just that most custom code is under-engineered, not dealing with XML but for a very limited, and usually un-specified subset of XML (no comments, no nested tags, no mixed content are common limitations).

    And if you didn't like my tongue-in-cheek police reference, how about calling my original answer a "consumer report" advice to recall the original code, would that fare better with you?