The architecture of Digester is very close to the SAX push parse model. SAX events are simply dispatched to matching rules. Using a lower-level API like XMLPULL would just complicate the code, because Digester would have to translate between the pull and the push model. Not to speak about API compatibility ;-)
BTW, I *highly* doubt that the SAX parsing is a performance bottleneck in Digester. I assume that performance is most affected by the relection/introspection routines that are used to create objects, set properties, call methods, etc. Tal Lev-Ami wrote: > Performance. Parsers like XPP are much faster than any available SAX parser > (at least that I know of). > See http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-injava. > The performance comes at the expense of full standard compliance but for > most documents that isn't really important. I don't think that XML Pull > should replace SAX, just be another usage option. > I haven't done a benchmark of the Digester it self, maybe the XML parsing > part is not the main problem, but I have a feeling it is. > > Tal Lev-Ami > Trivnet Ltd. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Sanders [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wed, September 18, 2002 1:27 AM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: RE: [Digester] XML Pull > > > Would there be a good reason for it, other than because we can? > > Scott > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Tal Lev-Ami [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 5:13 AM >>To: Jakarta Commons Developers List (E-mail) >>Subject: [Digester] XML Pull >> >> >>Anybody tried to adapt the Digester to work with XML Pull >>(http://www.xmlpull.org)? >>It should be fairly easy to do and there are pretty fast >>parsers out there. >> >>Tal Lev-Ami >>Trivnet Ltd. -- Christopher Lenz /=/ cmlenz at gmx.de -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
