Re: Design Question - multiple XML parsers/ dependencies

Hi Robert.

Thanks!

On 2019-4-1 5:33 PM, Robert Klemme wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 11:54 AM Gerald Bauer <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I am always a bit skeptical about these approaches (i.e. providing a
> general wrapper) because you either have to agree on the least common
> denominator of features or have to implement features in the wrapping
> layer. In any case the wrapping layer needs to be updated whenever one
> of the backend changes, which potentially creates a lot of maintenance
> effort.

You are right about this. I think if there are issues, we will need to 
make one or the other a prerequisite. For now, it's a case that we are 
moving out of REXML... but haven't decided if we want to force the 
dependency on ox.

> Also, especially with REXML in the mix I believe that had some quirks
> related to encodings in the past. So generally testing effort will be
> quite high. My 0.02€.

Thanks! As above, REXML works for us... so, hopefully, the rest is 
easier still. Also, we are currently only parsing an XML file, so it 
might be easier still.

> If only a few operations are used then the situation might look
> different. Still you add one dimension to the test matrix because you
> have to test all target system configuration combinations.

Yes, it is only a few operations. But you make an excellent point.

I think I have seen nokogiri mentioned a lot and if we were using 
Nokogiri, perhaps, I would have cared less. Just that ox seemed less 
popular but worked very well (and very fast) for our scenario. So, I was 
unsure if I should force that dependency also because ox installation is 
a bit difficult on Windows which is where we use it most.

Best Regards,
Mohit.



Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-talk>