Re: [xml-dev] Speed in Languages and Browser Architectures

["derek denny-brown" <zuligag@gmail.com>]

The .NET v2 parser is faster that the old C++ parser mostly because
the C++ parser was a 1st gen XML parser while the .NET parser is ~3rd
gen.  Also, the C++ parser had to have namespace processing layered,
because XML Namespaces as they are known now, didn't exist until the
core of the parser was long done.  If you took the same basic
principles that make the .NET parser so fast, I am extremely confident
you could build a faster C++ parser.

On 3/2/07, Michael Champion <mc@xegesis.org> wrote:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: derek denny-brown [mailto:zuligag@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 12:40 PM
> > To: Elliotte Harold
> > Cc: Rick Marshall; Tei; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> > Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Speed in Languages and Browser Architectures
>
> > Except that we are talking about the performance of XML parsers, and
> > XML is all about string processing and Java string processing is slow.
> >  Java XML parsing will never be faster than a good XML parser written
> > in C.  There is just too much overhead, and C benefits from 'struct's,
> > the lack of which hinders ones ability to write certain constructs
> > efficiently in Java.    Any sufficiently fast Java XML parser could be
> > ported to C and made faster in the process.
>
> You would know the answer and be able to talk about it, so I'll ask you,
> Derek:  Aren't the Microsoft .NET parsers faster than the Native parsers?
> If so, is that because the MSXML crew have been so busy with the plumbing
> that they haven't been able to focus on optimization, because .NET string
> processing is faster than Java, or what?
>
>
>