[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date]

[xsl] Concensus on the most elegant XPath/etc implementation


Subject: [xsl] Concensus on the most elegant XPath/etc implementation
From: "Justin Johansson procode@xxxxxxxxxxx" <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 2 May 2015 18:07:11 -0000

In this community's view, are there any specific XPath/XQuery/XSLT 2.0+ implementations that stand out source code wise as being (subjectively) particularly elegant in terms of spec mapping to code? I know that Saxon is more-or-less the (gold-standard) reference implementation circa Java 1.0 genealogy but the source code is trying (no disrespect intended). Then there is XBase which arguably a little more modern and others like Sedna etc in non-JVM languages which approach the implementation problem differently.

Is it fair to say that there exists no XPath 2.0+ implementation that can be said to be really elegant and that the "accepted as good" products are simply heroic works of megaSLOCs in less-that-desirable available programming languages?

I don't know, but my feeling is that the implementation of XPath 2.0+ should not have been as difficult as it seems to be and perhaps the available language platforms just haven't helped to produce good orthogonal, DRY stuff. You know what I mean; it shouldn't be difficult but it is.

Cynically asking, does anyone actually care if XPath/XQuery has a really cool behind-the-scenes source code implementation?

Justin Johansson
XPath implementation aspirant.


Current Thread
Keywords