axis-c-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Samisa Abeysinghe" <SAbeysin...@virtusa.com>
Subject RE: Moving Guththila to Axis C++ src tree
Date Mon, 27 Jun 2005 11:47:30 GMT
I am strongly +1 for replacing src/xml/tspp and src/xml/txpp with the
latest working versions.

However, I think it is better to have the parser implementation and
parser integration code separate. As I understand, Guththila is the
parser implementation. Hence it should go to src/guththila and not
src/xml/guththila. The src/xml/guththila folder should have the parser
integration code where it implements the xml/XMLParser.h API using
Guththila. 

As far as tests are concerned, it is as simple as changing the
axiscpp.conf file to use the Guththila based parser lib and run the test
framework. I do not think we have to have a separate set of tests. As we
have exec time info logged through the current test framework, we could
easily compare the performance improvement. However the greatest
challenge I see here is to get as much as tests passing with the new
parser implementation. Currently with Xerces, using C++ server side, we
get about 100 to 110 tests pasing.

Thanks,
Samisa...

-----Original Message-----
From: Dasarath Weeratunge [mailto:dasarath@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 4:58 PM
To: Lilantha Darshana -1
Cc: Apache AXIS C Developers List
Subject: Re: Moving Guththila to Axis C++ src tree

On 6/27/05, Lilantha Darshana <Lilantha.Darshana@siebel.com> wrote:
> If we have a successful impl. at hand we should move this in and
replace
> existing
> and then we improve i

my point exactly.

> 
> I'm not sure there are many uses of either **/xml/tspp/ and
**/xml/txpp/
> for the
> time being if I'm not mistaken?? Could any one let me know if we have
> any release
> level tests that uses **/xml/tspp/ and **/xml/txpp/?

to my understanding, even though both Susantha and Damitha started
adding encoding support to the tspp code that I wrote, neither could
complete it to the level of conducting tests. Further I went on to
work independly of them and now the parser (the state machine) has
been improved but that code has not been integrated with tspp/txpp...
i.e. what u have in the src tree. Hence the src tree is now outdated.
Dinesh started with my code and now he has added encoding support for
that code. So this is the latest code that we have.

> 
> Would it be possible to do some XML 1.0 compliancy & performance check
> before we decide? If you would able to make it against
xerces/sax/expat
> and JSR 173 -
> http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/final/jsr173/index.html
> It would be great.

I'm not sure why this is necessary at this point since this is
basically to get the src tree in sync with the latest code-- of course
the more test we do the better it is but I'm not very keen on
performance tests even before we get the parser going. The tests that
we have prepared are to test the functionality and not intended to
compare performance. Further though I have revised the basic state
machine several times the encoding part is still very fresh and there
is a lot that can be improved. I'm confident that given time Guththila
pick up.


--dasarath

> 
> Where can we see the currently impl code?
> 
> Thanks
> -Lilantha
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dasarath Weeratunge [mailto:dasarath@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2005 12:34 PM
> To: axis-c-dev@ws.apache.org
> Subject: Moving Guththila to Axis C++ src tree
> 
> Hi,
> 
> How about moving Guththila code into the Axis C++ src tree?
> 
> Dinesh is trying to implement XMLParser interface in XMLParser.h for
> Guththila. At the moment the code that we have in the src tree
> **/xml/tspp/ and **/xml/txpp/ are both old versions of Guththila
> written by Susantha, Damitha and my self.
> 
> Dinesh's code cannot be integrated with either one of these since its
a
> different fork of tspp altogether.
> 
> What I propose therefore is that we take off this code and substitute
> Dinesh's code in their place. We can create a new subdirectory
> `guththila'
> at the same level as `xerces' and `expat' under **/xml/ and delete
> old subdirectories `tspp' and `txpp'.
> 
> Dinesh's code builds on tspp code and implements a full StAX parser
> with the exception of DTD's and a few other constructs rarely used in
> Soap processing. It also supports character encoding schemes and comes
> with a set of test cases. The encoding related code in the new code
base
> has
> been completely rewritten unlike earlier (see **/xml/txpp/) where we
> tried
> to reuse code from expat. We also improved the tokenizing code and API
> to be in
> line with StAX.
> 
> IMHO cleaning up the src tree would make life easier for us who are
> working on Guththila since then we can directly commit our code to the
> CVS.
> 
> Regards,
> --dasarath
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________
> Siebel
> IT'S ALL ABOUT THE CUSTOMER
> Visit www.siebel.com
> 
> This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
and contains confidential and/or privileged information belonging to
Siebel Systems, Inc. or its customers or partners. Any unauthorized
review, use, copying, disclosure or distribution of this message is
strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient of this
message, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all soft
and hard copies of the message and any attachments. Thank you for your
cooperation.
> 
>

Mime
View raw message