Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
Amos Shapira wrote:
What do people around here like to use for EFFICIENT XML parsing?
Isn't Efficient XML an oxymoron?
Seriously, and despite the flame bait way I've introduced the subject,
if you need to do XML parsing in a way which is more efficient then
Xerces, maybe it is an indication that XML is a not a proper way to
encode you r data.
I'll bite.
Without knowing Xerces too deeply, I think you can do MUCH faster than
it, by feeding the schema before hand. Theoretically (though, the last
time I said this word on this list an actual project came out [1]), you
can write a parser that receives the schema, and produces yacc (or
bison++) output for parsing it. That would, of course, make a compiler
compiler compiler, but who's counting? You can then take the input file,
and follow the usual procedures for generating C++, and then binary,
from them.
How about using a binary format which is "compiled" from XML ?
In this day and age, is it really all that faster? What makes XML hard
to parse, IMHO, is not the fact that it's text, it's the fact that it's
hierarchal.
You get all the benefits of using XML and no parsing overhead.
Well, you lose one benefit - it's no longer in a standard parsable, nor
even textual, format.
Gilad
Shachar
=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
