Re: Simpler than XML::Simple

The only solution for this type of problem is XML::Compile.

Why? Apparently the problem here is to get XML data serialized as perl data structures. I see two use cases: either the producer and the consumer of the XML data is the same system, or it is different systems, for example us and a different party.

In the first case I don't see why to go the XML path at all. It is much easier to code and probably much more efficient if just a data serialization format is used --- YAML, JSON, Storable, bencode, perl (Data::Dumper) or whatever. Typically this involves one line of code for serializing and deserializing, and should always be faster than doing some XML parsing.

In the second case there are two parties which need to handle the XML data. In this case, you must have an XML schema, to have a contract how the XML data should look like. And if you have the XML schema, then you can easily use XML::Compile to gain at least the simplicity of serializing and deserializing.

Comment on Re: Simpler than XML::Simple

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Simpler than XML::Simple by grantm (Parson) on Nov 22, 2010 at 21:16 UTC
In the second case there are two parties which need to handle the XML data. In this case, you must have an XML schema Heh, good luck with that it in the real world :-) My real-world experience led me to postulate the law of The "Perl end" of XML.	[reply]
Re^3: Simpler than XML::Simple (OT) by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Nov 22, 2010 at 21:31 UTC
The [Perl side] inevitably has to bend over and take it. I'm furious with you, sir -- furious! -- for making so much pain seem so fscking funny.	[reply]
Re^4: Simpler than XML::Simple (OT) by jdporter (Paladin) on Sep 20, 2012 at 00:26 UTC
That's the price of being flexible.	[reply]
Re^3: Simpler than XML::Simple by Anonymous Monk on Sep 19, 2012 at 22:00 UTC
Aw, dang it! The link "Perl End" gives an error page. Got update?	[reply]
Re^4: Simpler than XML::Simple by Anonymous Monk on Sep 20, 2012 at 08:05 UTC
bad redirect rule :) but long ago I learned http://use.perl.org/use.perl.org/~grantm/journal/33887 becomes http://use.perl.org/use.perl.org/_grantm/journal/33887.html	[reply]
Re^5: Simpler than XML::Simple by hippo (Bishop) on Apr 03, 2019 at 08:25 UTC
Re^2: Simpler than XML::Simple by Jenda (Abbot) on Nov 22, 2010 at 20:07 UTC
"Must have an XML schema" ... get real! Yeah, you might have a schema. And the schema migh even be reasonable. Quite often it's not. Ever heard for example of HR-XML? What a ... massive overcomplicated schema. With each company using different parts of the schema. A mess. There is never "the only solution". Jenda Enoch was right! Enjoy the last years of Rome.	[reply]
Re^3: Simpler than XML::Simple by Anonymous Monk on Nov 24, 2010 at 18:30 UTC
Well, the real world ... my experience is that it's hard to get just well-formed and correctly encoded XML files from external parties. Did you know that the "trang" tool is capable of creating a schema out of sample data? So I don't see the advantage with using XML::Smart.	[reply]
Re^4: Simpler than XML::Simple by Jenda (Abbot) on Nov 24, 2010 at 19:23 UTC
I don't see the advantage with using XML::Smart either :-) Jenda Enoch was right! Enjoy the last years of Rome.	[reply]
Re^5: Simpler than XML::Simple by Anonymous Monk on Nov 25, 2010 at 15:19 UTC

In Section Cool Uses for Perl