On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Paul J. Lucas wrote:
> You may think XML::Simple results in simpler data structures;
> however, the mental energy expended to refigure stuff out makes
> XML::Simple more complex in the long term. Aside from being
> slow, this is another complaint about it.
I've never heard anyone complain about it being slow. I'm not saying
XML::Tree isn't faster, just that I've never heard that complaint about
XML::Simple, simply because people don't use it for parsing large files,
just small config files.
The only reference I can find on Google that says XML::Simple and slow are
the XML::Simple man page talking about eval being slow (or not, depending
on the eval type). Deja has no references at all. I guess maybe your
measures are different to, erm, the rest of the internet's :-)
As for being more complex to use, I would say XML::Simple's popularity
speaks for itself (especially when compared with say XML::DOM or Grove or
even XPath).
--
<Matt/>
/|| ** Director and CTO **
//|| ** AxKit.com Ltd ** ** XML Application Serving **
// || ** http://axkit.org ** ** XSLT, XPathScript, XSP **
// \\| // ** Personal Web Site: http://sergeant.org/ **
\\//
//\\
// \\
