Can we keep std.xml : encode, decode ?

Tue Jul 21 07:55:25 UTC 2020

On Monday, 20 July 2020 at 14:04:57 UTC, WebFreak001 wrote:
> Whenever operating with any XML files, even if not using the 
> std.xml API, I very often use encode/decode to insert strings 
> into fixed file templates.
>
> I think a lot of people will have used and still use these APIs 
> because they are in the standard library and very trivial short 
> implementations you can expect to exist. I think for these two 
> small functions pulling in a dub library is overkill and often 
> will not work well for script-like D files.
>
> `std.xml` is being removed for being considered "out-dated and 
> not up to Phobos' current standards", however I believe the 
> encode/decode functions are close enough to the current 
> standards or can be fairly easily modified or reimplemented to 
> meet them.
>
> I believe putting the XML parser, DOM & serializer from std.xml 
> into undeaD is a good idea, however I think the very basic 
> string utilities that many more programs might use should stay 
> in.
>
> For example currently some simple script that is called in a 
> cronjob could be used to automatically generate a static HTML 
> file given some input from some other program:
>
> import std.conv;
> import std.stdio;
> import std.xml : encode;
>
> void main(string[] args)
> {
> 	writeln("<!DOCTYPE html><html>");
> 	writeln("<head><title>Auto generated site</title></head>");
> 	writeln("<body>");
> 	writeln(`<h1 title="`, args.to!string.encode, `">`);
> 	writeln("Last call: ", args.to!string.encode);
> 	writeln("</h1>");
> 	writeln("</body></html>");
> }

We should really just have something like std.dom which would 
contain things like that.