Re: XQuery (and XML) vs LISP

From: Frank Hamersley <terabitemightbe_at_bigpond.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 11:04:39 GMT
Message-ID: <btCKf.13039$yK1.8191_at_news-server.bigpond.net.au>

Mark Johnson wrote:
> Frank Hamersley <terabitemightbe_at_bigpond.com> wrote:

>>Mark Johnson wrote:
>>>Frank Hamersley <terabitemightbe_at_bigpond.com> wrote:
>>>>Mark Johnson wrote:
>>>>>"Marshall  Spight" <marshall.spight_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>Mark Johnson wrote:
>>>>>>>Christopher Browne <cbbrowne_at_acm.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>Are you referring to me as the "other guy"?
>>> 
>>>You were, at that point.
>>
>>I'm not that now?
>

> Were, though.

I always wondered if I was bipolar, now I know! :-)

>>>>If so I don't "agree" with you at all - I was pointing out that simple 
>>>>examples are most useful for teaching basic knowledge.
>>> 
>>>You were trying to defend such. I said that. You also admitted such
>>>was the case. And that's all I was saying.
>> 
>>Firstly I think I succeeded! Secondly there is no admission on my part - 
>>it is a simple statement of practicalities.

>
> I think you succeeded in agreeing with my complaint, but did not at
> all agree that it should be offered as a complaint.

Yep.

>>None of which supports your underlying perspective which I would state 
>>as "the RM is inadequate

>
> I don't think it's at all inadequate.

OK - I had formed a view based on your previous posts that in your opinion the RM is was too cumbersome for small jobs, and secondly because nobody documents example designs for difficult problems that it may also be less than useful for those as well.

Cheers, Frank. Received on Tue Feb 21 2006 - 12:04:39 CET