> Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> 

>>
>>>Because of this, they have a
>>>syntax that is *very* easy to parse for a computer (as an example,
>>>the XML grammar fits in about 200 lines, whereas the C grammar takes
>>>over 400 lines (and that's *without* the preprocessor!)
>>
>>No XML is better discussion (not sure if that is your argument or not),
>>please, those lead nowhere. XML being easy to parse is not an argument for
>>anybody who knows something about (programming) language theory - the
>>complexity of a grammar* isn't defined by the name of the language after all ;-)
>>
> 
> 	I don't understand your answer so I can't really answer to it, but
> I'll try to clarify my post:
> ...
I also found Thorsten's opening sentence confusing, but I was finally 
able to parse it as meaning:
      No "XML is better" discussion, please...

      -=- Larry -=-

Post a reply to this message