Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Do people still use XML?

Do people still use XML?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
dockerdata-structuresxmljsonquestion
46 Posts 15 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • D Dean Roddey

    XML is widely used. And, it's often a lot more convenient than JSON, since you can create a DTD that lets the parser do a lot of the grunt work for you. I use it all over the place. I only use JSON if it's already part of the protocol of a device I'm talking to or it's stuff related to talking to Javascript in a browser.

    Explorans limites defectum

    H Offline
    H Offline
    honey the codewitch
    wrote on last edited by
    #34

    I mostly use JSON these days for data interchange, but I hear you about typing. That being said, there's a spec for JSON schemas, and many engines already support validation using them. I don't use them myself. In the real world, most JSON is machine generated, which means it doesn't necessarily need heavy validation unless its coming from somewhere external (to avoid possible exploits)

    When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.

    D 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • H honey the codewitch

      I mostly use JSON these days for data interchange, but I hear you about typing. That being said, there's a spec for JSON schemas, and many engines already support validation using them. I don't use them myself. In the real world, most JSON is machine generated, which means it doesn't necessarily need heavy validation unless its coming from somewhere external (to avoid possible exploits)

      When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.

      D Offline
      D Offline
      Dean Roddey
      wrote on last edited by
      #35

      For me lots of it is user configuration, or data from external devices or servers, none of which can be assumed to be even reasonably correct. And, ultimately, it all really probably should get good validation. If your program croaks because of an error in another program, that's not a good thing.

      Explorans limites defectum

      H 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • D Dean Roddey

        For me lots of it is user configuration, or data from external devices or servers, none of which can be assumed to be even reasonably correct. And, ultimately, it all really probably should get good validation. If your program croaks because of an error in another program, that's not a good thing.

        Explorans limites defectum

        H Offline
        H Offline
        honey the codewitch
        wrote on last edited by
        #36

        that's what error handling is for. Validation just lets you throw sooner. A lot of times that's not even necessary.

        When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • H honey the codewitch

          I can't use JSON for rendering a parse tree because JSON does not preserve the order of subelements and because of the way multiple values are presented it gives json problems. XML can do it, because XML preserves element order and an element can be present more than once within its parent container. But I don't want to bother if everyone hates XML. What would you do?

          When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.

          M Offline
          M Offline
          Mycroft Holmes
          wrote on last edited by
          #37

          I would not use XML if there was serious volume involved, I've seen systems fail using xlm when attempting to transfer gb between systems. As others have said use the correct tool for the job no matter whet the "popularity" you perceive is.

          Never underestimate the power of human stupidity - RAH I'm old. I know stuff - JSOP

          realJSOPR H 2 Replies Last reply
          0
          • H honey the codewitch

            I can't use JSON for rendering a parse tree because JSON does not preserve the order of subelements and because of the way multiple values are presented it gives json problems. XML can do it, because XML preserves element order and an element can be present more than once within its parent container. But I don't want to bother if everyone hates XML. What would you do?

            When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.

            G Offline
            G Offline
            Gary R Wheeler
            wrote on last edited by
            #38

            For what it's worth, XML has been my preferred persistence format for a long time. It makes it relatively easy to manage arbitrary structure and schema changes, UNICODE, and so on. It also translates well to other programming environments and languages, given that support is fairly ubiquitous. It's no longer "flavor of the month", but it has the advantage of... it works.

            Software Zen: delete this;

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • realJSOPR realJSOP

              If you need to guarantee that your objects stay in order, use XML. JSON is subject to the engine that's parsing it, where XML is - well - XML. The only thing I think most real programmers hate is any form of visual basic.

              ".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
              -----
              You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
              -----
              When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013

              G Offline
              G Offline
              Gary R Wheeler
              wrote on last edited by
              #39

              #realJSOP wrote:

              The only thing I think most real programmers hate is any form of visual basic.

              That sounds like a challenge :laugh:. Let's see.

              • Windows installer and writing install packages for it
              • Writing Windows device drivers
              • Writing Windows device driver installers
              • Creating Windows install images when a new revision of the OS comes out
              • The MSDN web site, which Microsoft redesigns to obscure the fact they're removing content so they don't have to support it

              and that's just the crap I can think of associated with Microsoft and Windows. If I got started on software management in a hardware-centric company, two things would happen. One, I'd probably exceed Chris' message length limit, and two my ass would be terminated with extreme prejudice.

              Software Zen: delete this;

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • M Mycroft Holmes

                I would not use XML if there was serious volume involved, I've seen systems fail using xlm when attempting to transfer gb between systems. As others have said use the correct tool for the job no matter whet the "popularity" you perceive is.

                Never underestimate the power of human stupidity - RAH I'm old. I know stuff - JSOP

                realJSOPR Offline
                realJSOPR Offline
                realJSOP
                wrote on last edited by
                #40

                There’s a way around the big-ass file problem, but it comes with restrictions. A few months ago, I wrote some code to load files that were as large as 8gb. It could probably go larger, but that’s the largest file I had.

                ".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
                -----
                You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
                -----
                When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013

                H M 2 Replies Last reply
                0
                • M Mycroft Holmes

                  I would not use XML if there was serious volume involved, I've seen systems fail using xlm when attempting to transfer gb between systems. As others have said use the correct tool for the job no matter whet the "popularity" you perceive is.

                  Never underestimate the power of human stupidity - RAH I'm old. I know stuff - JSOP

                  H Offline
                  H Offline
                  honey the codewitch
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #41

                  The "job" is undefined. I'm making an API. Anyway, I'm not sure I'm going through with this bit. Besides I have other stuff to work on that has taken precedence.

                  When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • realJSOPR realJSOP

                    There’s a way around the big-ass file problem, but it comes with restrictions. A few months ago, I wrote some code to load files that were as large as 8gb. It could probably go larger, but that’s the largest file I had.

                    ".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
                    -----
                    You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
                    -----
                    When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013

                    H Offline
                    H Offline
                    honey the codewitch
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #42

                    I design pretty much everything assuming my files are going to be 16GB meaning i use streams and (when necessary) pull parsers. I *always* chunk, absent the narrow case where it doesn't make sense to.

                    When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • realJSOPR realJSOP

                      There’s a way around the big-ass file problem, but it comes with restrictions. A few months ago, I wrote some code to load files that were as large as 8gb. It could probably go larger, but that’s the largest file I had.

                      ".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
                      -----
                      You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
                      -----
                      When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013

                      M Offline
                      M Offline
                      Mycroft Holmes
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #43

                      It was a few years ago and was basically transferring a daily snapshot of a banking system to a reporting/analysis tool with biztalk in the mix. System was totally unwieldy and got canned before it was completed. XML was never used again as a transfer medium.

                      Never underestimate the power of human stupidity - RAH I'm old. I know stuff - JSOP

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • H honey the codewitch

                        I can't use JSON for rendering a parse tree because JSON does not preserve the order of subelements and because of the way multiple values are presented it gives json problems. XML can do it, because XML preserves element order and an element can be present more than once within its parent container. But I don't want to bother if everyone hates XML. What would you do?

                        When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.

                        R Offline
                        R Offline
                        Ravi Bhavnani
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #44

                        Prolly stating the obvious, but can you package subelements as items in an array? /ravi

                        My new year resolution: 2048 x 1536 Home | Articles | My .NET bits | Freeware ravib(at)ravib(dot)com

                        H 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • R Ravi Bhavnani

                          Prolly stating the obvious, but can you package subelements as items in an array? /ravi

                          My new year resolution: 2048 x 1536 Home | Articles | My .NET bits | Freeware ravib(at)ravib(dot)com

                          H Offline
                          H Offline
                          honey the codewitch
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #45

                          they need names. i could, but the resulting json isn't worth it [ {a: b}, {c: d} , {e: f} ] sucks, you know? better to just use xml

                          When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • H honey the codewitch

                            I can't use JSON for rendering a parse tree because JSON does not preserve the order of subelements and because of the way multiple values are presented it gives json problems. XML can do it, because XML preserves element order and an element can be present more than once within its parent container. But I don't want to bother if everyone hates XML. What would you do?

                            When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.

                            M Offline
                            M Offline
                            Mark_Wallace
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #46

                            Use PostScript. It's like a version of XML that hasn't had its bollocks lopped off.

                            I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            Reply
                            • Reply as topic
                            Log in to reply
                            • Oldest to Newest
                            • Newest to Oldest
                            • Most Votes


                            • Login

                            • Don't have an account? Register

                            • Login or register to search.
                            • First post
                              Last post
                            0
                            • Categories
                            • Recent
                            • Tags
                            • Popular
                            • World
                            • Users
                            • Groups