Re: jdom 1.1

Le 02-sept.-08 à 09:21, [email protected] a écrit :
> the xml document is just an example document to test all the  
> parsers. I know that Sax would be a better choise, but I wanted to  
> mesure the time with JDOM.

Sure!

> I think I don't can post an url because I don't have webspace.

Free ones are available just about everywhere.
http://jira.activemath.org would have allowed you to upload for example.
Alternatively, this document is coming from some other source (from a  
book of Eliotte Rusty Harold? Googling for the document name did not  
help).

> What do you meen by "there is a JDOM contrib that goed in thes  
> direction"?
> better processors: I think you meen SAX?

Now, I can't find it anymore but I believe Laurent Bihanic had made a  
special builder that called your listener everytime a given element is  
parsed, e.g. children of a given element. It was then forgotten. Can  
someone remember that?
It can be reprogrammed, a matter of two or three hours....

The crux of it all here is memory allocation, as usual: huge lists,  
huge runs of characters are problem number 1 for this. If you stream,  
i.e. things go away steadily as things get processed, you don't have  
this problem.

That's why SAX is better (but is hard) and StAX as well.
But JDOM's flexibility is quite unbeatable, therefore a "granular  
parser" which would give you a JDOM element every now and then and  
otherwise throw it away can scale for your usage.

A similar usage would be the parsing of log files which have a growing  
tendency to become XML.

> Do you think I can reach the developers of Jdom?

You did. Jason Hunter is one of the dads of JDOM.
The mailing-list is the sole communication mechanism.

paul

_______________________________________________
To control your jdom-interest membership:
http://www.jdom.org/mailman/options/jdom-interest/[email protected]