Re: [xml-dev] Re: [docbook-apps] Small!! Lightweight!! xslt processorwhi

[James Fuller <james.fuller.2007@gmail.com>]

On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 12:12 AM, Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> wrote:
>>IT was once done with 4MB machines, doing the same with today's machines
>> and XML/XSLT goes up to 400MB as minimum.
>
> I don't think this is something specific to XML and XSLT. Memory is so cheap
> nowadays there is very little pressure or incentive to keep things small.
> The JDK grows and grows because people want more functionality more than
> they want a smaller footprint.
>
> Having said that, I suspect that one can parse and transform a small
> document using quite a bit less than 400Mb of memory - though I can't say
> I've tried it recently.

I completely agree with Dr. Kay on this.

there is little pressure to keep things small, and very large pressure
to deliver things quickly.

This tension invariably means a drift to use up all available memory
first before you start optimising said usage of memory.

I gave up getting 'disgusted' or 'surprised' at wastefulness of memory
a long time ago, I don't advocate it and in some respects knowing
older (more efficient) algorithms gives one an advantage over todays
'feature driven' programmers who rush to get the primary feature
implemented to find that they have something that works in limited
environment.

anyhow ... you could give sablotron a try (xslt processor 1.0 circa 2000 era).

gl, Jim Fuller