Re: XML::LibXSLT registered functions: a preliminary fix

Elizabeth Mattijsen wrote:
> At 14:25 +0100 12/11/03, Robin Berjon wrote:
> > Personally I don't mind either way: I still like the idea of having 
> > registered functions work just the same for LibXSLT and XPathContext
>
> Well, I posted a message about this about 10 days ago or so: from what I 
> understood there is that LibXSLT and XPathContext are two different 
> modules, with two different approaches and never the twain shall meet.

I must have been sleeping or something. The twain can meet, at least 
somehow:

  http://search.cpan.org/~rberjon/XML-XPathExt-0.01_01/XPathExt.pm

That's a very very very alpha thing, it's there as a show of how it 
could be done. If XML::LibXSLT extensions stop blowing up on me, I'll be 
happy to finish and test it properly, and release a nicer version.

> > ...and that requires loading a module anyway so loading yours too 
> > would be fine by me.
>
> Hmmm... on the other hand, maybe the whole "register_function" 
> functionality should be taken out of the standard XML::LibXSLT module 
> and put in XML::LibXSLT::Functions ?  Then you would have less to load 
> if you're not using registered functions, and you would always have 
> correctly functioning registered functions if you want to (by also using 
> XML::LibXSLT::Functions).

That's certainly an option. Honestly I'd be so delighted to see this 
work well that I have difficulty forming an opinion about which place it 
would be best to put the functionality. I'm happy having to dance around 
a bleeding chicken if it means I get extension functions that work well ;)

--
Robin Berjon
_______________________________________________
Perl-XML mailing list
Perl-XML@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: http://listserv.ActiveState.com/mailman/mysubs