xml-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Edwin Goei" <Edwin.G...@eng.sun.com>
Subject Re: [spinnaker] Announce
Date Mon, 10 Jul 2000 21:18:54 GMT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Hodges" <harmony2@swbell.net>
To: <general@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2000 1:44 PM
Subject: RE: [spinnaker] Announce


>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: costin@eng.sun.com [mailto:costin@eng.sun.com]
> > Sent: Monday, July 10, 2000 12:54 PM
> > To: general@xml.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [spinnaker] Announce
> >
> >
> > > Besides, if anyone (and people from Sun in particular since I expect
> > > them to be the best experts in the matter) would help improving Xerces
> > > performance over Hotspot it would be great!!!
> >
> > I think the main problem here is the lack of clean interfaces and
modular
> > structure in xerces, not the quality of hotspot.
> >
> > I think JDK1.1 optimizations are _great_, but should be used only with
> > JDK1.1, and not with JDK1.3 ( IBM or Sun).
>
> To me, this is a major failing on Sun's part.  For a long time, Sun's Java
> compilers and VMs did a horrible job of optimizing code.  Simple
> optimizations that most developers expect from a modern compiler were
> missing.  But Java was so cool that we started to do the optimizations on
> our own.

The main objection I have to the current Xerces code is not about which VM
it runs on, but on the ability for a developer to understand the code and
make changes to it.  I think one major reason there has not been more
developer participation is because the code is difficult to understand.  As
I said in a previous email message, I looked at two other parsers that I
believe are easier to understand: Aelfred2 (not Apache) and Crimson/ProjectX
(I did not write it, BTW).  With Xerces it takes much more effort to
understand the code and I prefer not to make changes to code I don't
understand.

-Edwin


Mime
View raw message