OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] Parsing efficiency? - why not 'compile'????

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

David Megginson wrote:
> Matthew.Bennett@facs.gov.au writes:
>  > Why parse repeatedly, if it's so damned inefficient? Why not come
>  > up with the concept of a 'compiled' xml document; one where
>  > structural info. is stored, and access is *FAST*, and validity and
>  > well-formedness have already been 'certified'? No-one's surprised
>  > that interpretive languages are execution dogs compared to compiled
>  > versions (because of no on-going parsing!), so why the mock horror
>  > that interpretive XML is so inefficient?
> This is not a new idea, but despite many bold attempts and breathless
> announcements, in five years no one has come up with anything that has
> caught on.

In fact, things have caught on under the hood here and there, without making 
much fuss. For instance Cocoon has cXML and Perl has XML::Filter::Cache both of 
which store a simple list of SAX events in order to simulate a parse, only 
faster. In the wild, you will find a variety of more or less ad hoc solutions to 
the same problem.

What is true however is that no interoperable solution has been devised yet.

Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
Research Engineer, Expway        http://expway.fr/
7FC0 6F5F D864 EFB8 08CE  8E74 58E6 D5DB 4889 2488


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS