On Thu, 19 Jul 2001 03:05:33 Mark Lillywhite wrote:
> Hi
> With my changes to FOP I can process tens of thousands of pages of 
> XML:FO in only a few Mb of heap. I have asked for testers but so far 
> noone has responded... this sounds like an ideal environment in which to 
> test, no? The performance of FOP seems also to have improved, probably 
> because the GC is a lot less stressful (far fewer objects to scan and 
> far fewer OS memory requests being performed).

I'll take a look at it, although I don't really have anywhere decent to
actually test it properly.

> One of the main problems with FOP IMHO is not that it is poorly designed 
> but that there has been little control over the quality of the code that 
> is present there. There are wild variations in the code, assumptions 
> made in it, commenting, use of public/private members, coupling, 
> cohesion, maturity, you name it and it changes from file to file and 
> module to module. I make this observation because a redesign of FOP is 
> not going to make these issues go away - another solution is required.

and at the end of the day FOP still doesn't do what it is intended to do
(format XSL properly).

The only way to move forward on this is to decide where we stand on such
things as:
- jdk version
- data structures
- use of data structures
- etc.

(once I have cvs access again) I will be setting up all elements to read
all the relevant properties. With that I will be looking at how the
information is handled.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to