Personally, I would like to see a system where static and DLL based implementations can be supported. With the abstraction layer that will be needed to support multiple parsers, adding an implementation layer that loads a DLL should be reasonably straightforward.
However, a system that uses static linking is essential for some applications. ...Duane --- At Fri, 11 Nov 2005 10:50:26 +0000, Paul Fremantle wrote: >Nandika > >At some point we should decide how much is done by compile time options >and how much by DLL loading. Certainly I think we will want to ship >an .exe that has our preferred parser built in (for simplicity). But in >Axis1/C++ we used DLL linking for the parser which made it easier to change. > >Paul > >On 11/11/05, nandika jayawardana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Hi all, >It is time that we should remove guththila dependency from code and make >an abstraction layer so that other parser can also be plugged in without >having to change code . > >So the idea is to have a axis2_pull_parser.h header file which defines >the xml pull parser api used by the axis2 which can be implemented to >write a wrapper for a new parser intended to be plugged in. > >The axis2_pull_parser.h header is defined using the stax api which is >implemented by guththila XML pull parser . > >axis2 will implement guththila as the default XML parser , anyone >willing to use another parser can recompile the code with the configure option >--with-pull-parser=<parser name from list> ...Duane
