commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin van den Bemt <>
Subject Re: [csv] Priorisation of enhancements
Date Sat, 11 Mar 2006 14:31:57 GMT
My problem was the same.. Currently catching up.
I thing preformance is that last on the list. Premature optimization is most of the time a
waste of 
time and it is better to have a good API, which allows easy optimization...
My goal is the first shoot for a no dependency solution btw, in short : as lightweight as
Still not sure if our goals of commons-csv are a match though, so still in doubt if I should
the stuff I did to my own cvs tree on
Feedback appreciated..


Henri Yandell wrote:
> On 2/22/06, Stefan Rufer <> wrote:
>>Henry proposed a series of enhancements for the commons-csv, including:
>>  - performance (poor for current implementation)
>>  - features
>>  - naming/design (introduce Csv instead of String[][], introduce
>>    CsvStrategy class)
>>For details of the tests and feature list see
>>IMO a possible priorisation of these tasks is:
>>1) naming/design
>>2) performance
>>3) features
> Given the slow performance of the current codebase, I'm tempted to
> think that 2) should be moving in parallel with 1). Either by
> hand-optimising the current one via a tool like YourKit or JProfiler;
> or by leaping over to generating a parser via a parser generator and
> making the assumption that it'll give us a performance improvement.
> Sorry for not replying to your previous emails; I'm right at the end
> of organizing a move to a new city, so my spare time has been
> demolished for the past few weeks.
> Hen
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message