Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: "Bill la Forge" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: "David Megginson" <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 11:09:56 -0500
From: David Megginson <email@example.com>
>Yes, but as someone (James Clark?) pointed out during the last round,
>with most serious applications you're going to end up doing hash
>lookups anyway, so the == doesn't buy you much.
At first blush, I had to agree with you. But consider the more interesting
pattern matching scenarios. Its not always reasonable to have to map
all processing into a hash lookup.
I'm really just suggesting a capability here. Just another way to tune an
application. If interned strings are used by the parser, why not share
that capability with filters/applicaitons?
Suppose we have a parser-kernel that we want to use with some new
wonderful schema that has been implemented in a filter? Something that
allows content validation based on ancestor patterns? Unless you are
willing to right some pretty convoluted code, interned strings would be helpful.
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:email@example.com)