- From: Phil Nash <phil.nash.lists@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 18:35:14 +0000
- To: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
- CC: XML Developers List <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>, W3C EXI Public <public-exi@w3.org>
Robin Berjon wrote: > * If you wish to be extra helpful, you can also include the small > amount of code and configuration required to run the parser within our > framework, which is built on top of Japex (https://japex.dev.java.net/). > If you're interested, we'd be delighted to help you get started. Does this imply that only java parsers will be considered? I've had a parser project in C++ on my shelf for a while now and am just turning back to look at it. It's heavily template based, using policies to turn on and off various types of support that may not be needed (and would otherwise inhibit performance) at compilation time. This means that, while it will be compliant (that is the aim), you can deliberately remove some features to squeeze more speed out if you know your use cases don't require it (e.g. various levels of validation, certain types of error handling, string conversions etc). By using templates I also avoid the overhead of virtual functions, which may or may not be significant, but I suspect it could be, in view of the number of them used in a typical transaction. As it is the implementation is a way off complete yet. What sort of time scales are we looking at? Best regards, [)o IhIL..
Received on Saturday, 25 March 2006 05:18:36 UTC