Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote: > Justin Johansson wrote: > > Adam Ruppe wrote: > >> I'm not terribly interested in it because I already wrote my own > >> replacement: http://arsdnet.net/dcode/dom.d > >> > >> Mine is biased toward HTML, doing what I personally find useful, or > >> mimicing what javascript in the browser would do instead of following > >> the standard, but if there's anything in there that is useful to > >> others, you're free to take it. > > > > Thanks Adam for replying. I'm happy to take onboard contra-views > > such as yours as well. Naturally it is no point in putting in an > > effort wherein there is no interest at large. > > > > Still, I'll wait for more replies on this ng before making any > > decision whether or not to commit myself to a new "D2 XML" effort. > > Clearly std.xml can't stay the way it is. I'm even thinking of removing > it preemptively in wait for another implementation.
I'd like to cast a vote for a SAX-style parser. A DOM parser can be built on top of it, and frankly, a SAX parser the only kind I'd ever use. I'm either working with large streams where building a tree is impractical, or performance is enough of an issue that again, building a tree is impractical. I have similar feelings about the JSON parser despite it being a pretty solid implementation otherwise. I'd contribute one if I could, but I did one for work and it just isn't worth the administrative hassle.
