On 6/27/05, Samisa Abeysinghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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.

yes, this is correct. we should do it like this

> 
> 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.

great! once integration is complete this would be pretty straight forward.

thanks
--dasarath

> 
> Thanks,
> Samisa...
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dasarath Weeratunge [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 Hence the src tree is now outdated.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:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2005 12:34 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > 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.
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to