On Tuesday, September 06, 2011 23:51:48 Marco Leise wrote: > Am 06.09.2011, 22:28 Uhr, schrieb Timon Gehr <timon.g...@gmx.ch>: > > On 09/06/2011 09:36 PM, notna wrote: > >> Sorry upfront, I didn't read this hole thread, so maybe I'm missing or > >> mixing something... > >> > >> How about a D binding for http://www.xmlsoft.org/ ? > >> > >> In other words, taking the "curl or sqlite3 path", something like > >> /etc/c/xml2 > > > > That is about 4 times slower than the Tango XML parser: > > > > http://dotnot.org/blog/archives/2008/03/10/xml-benchmarks-updated-graphs > > -with-rapidxml/ > You are so right, Timon. How deep is the trench between Phobos and Tango > devs? Tango's XML parser should really make it into Phobos.
A new std.xml is already in the works. It'll be range-based, unlike the Tango parser. But there's no reason why Phobos shouldn't be able to have a similarly-fast XML parser. As I understand it, the primary reason that the current std.xml is slow is because it uses delegates quite a bit, but I haven't used it myself, so I don't know all of the details. - Jonathan M Davis
