From: Bob Hutchison <hutch@...>
Date: 2002-05-13T20:38:04+09:00
Subject: Re: ANN: xampl-pp 0.0 XML Pull Parser


I've found it to be very difficult to compare the two parsers in terms of
speed. Xampl-pp deals with namespaces (I don't think Rexml handles
namespaces in its current streaming API) and it reports more events than
Rexml. Since, in some cases, xampl-pp is spending 30-40% of its time dealing
with namespaces I'd have expected Rexml to have something of an advantage. I
don't know what to say when I run some benchmarks and xampl-pp is twice as
fast as Rexml, and when I run others Rexml is twice as fast as xampl-pp.

As far as performance goes, xampl-pp is going to get faster. I'm using a
couple of idioms that can be improved and they are in critical regions of
the code, and I don't have the control over memory use that I'd like to see.

Sorry, but I can't give you a better answer than that.

Bob

On 5/12/02 10:38 AM, "Lafor" <lafor@arrakis.es> wrote:

>> The performance of xampl-pp is quite good.
>> 
> 
> Do you have any benchmarks (comparing with other ruby xml-parsers:
> rexml, nqxml, ...)
> 
> REXML do my streaming parsing quite fast, but if you can do it best :)
> 
> 
> ---
> <lf/>
> can't find a ruby package?
> try www.modrewrite.org/raf
> 
>