Re: Wish-list
Rolf Lear <[email protected]> Wed, 09 May 2012 22:24:56 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.java.jdom.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
The resolver is on the cards.... decisions need to be made whether it is specific enough to JDOM to be part of the JDOM project.... I am not objective enough to make that decision... ;-) Also, to be complete it requires items that are not really relevant to JDOM, like a mechanism to import/export/refresh the cache, etc.... The resolver can be built independently and merged later? The post I put on w3c.org and the git project have seen very little activity.... nothing, in fact. It *already* works.... I would *love* to hear how you expect JDOM (XML-based) and JSON to 'hang out' in the same place .... ;-) That's like getting VI and Emacs people to agree .... (odd how JDOM and JSON are just two typo's apart....) The DOM performance test is an interesting one.... something I could consider. Performance tests are very unreliable though, and nothing I could do would lay anything to rest, but it would be interesting to have a look-see, even if it is just to get an idea.... Based on the performance work I have done already it would appear that, for Hamlet at least, SAX+JDOM is faster than just DOM. Based on http://hunterhacker.github.com/jdom/jdom2/performance.html it would seem that the time taken to SAX+JDOM the hamlet file is about 4.75ms on my laptop, and the time to do DOM+JDOM is about 7.1ms with about 2.5ms of that being JDOM time.... (implying 4.6ms is DOM time) So, I would say it is currently neck-and-neck between SAX+JDOM and DOM... Rolf On 09/05/2012 5:26 PM, Brad Cox wrote: > Some personal wishes (since you asked) > > * Do the resolver!! > * One-stop API for parsing XML or JSON (perhaps MongoDB BSON?) > * Lay to rest the lingering ambiguity as to whether JDOM (compared to > W3C DOM) has a performance cost. Performance measurements, space > and/or time. > > On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 9:46 AM, Rolf Lear <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > _______________________________________________ To control your jdom-interest membership: http://www.jdom.org/mailman/options/jdom-interest/[email protected]