Phobos Proposal: replace std.xml with kxml.

Graham Fawcett fawcett at
Tue May 4 06:48:33 PDT 2010

On Mon, 03 May 2010 16:01:30 -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

> Graham Fawcett wrote:
>> The fact that libxml2/libxslt support not only XML parsing and DOM
>> building, but also XSLT, XPath, XPointer, XInclude, RelaxNG, etc.,
>> means that any homegrown library will be hard-pressed to cover the same
>> range of tools and features.
>> There are too many half-baked XML libraries in the world. No disrespect
>> intended to opticron or anyone else; it just doesn't make a lot of
>> sense to reinvent such a complex wheel (and believing that XML
>> processing isn't complex is a sure sign that your homegrown library's
>> design is incomplete!).
>> Graham
> I think what we need for the standard library is to take a solid XML
> library licensed generously and adapt it to work with arbitrary ranges.

By "adapt" do you mean writing a wrapper for an existing library, or 
translating the source code of the library into D? 

What constitutes a "generous license" in this context? (For what it's 
worth, libxml2 is under the MIT License.)


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list