And, to chant the mantra: Patches are always welcome. (Not that I've ever submitted any, but it begged to be said).
daniel wrote: > Thats a shame. > > It appears from our testing that non compiled xslt is an order of > magnitude slower then the compiled version. Which for our purposes is to > slow. > > I see from the msdn documentation that loading by type was added in .net > 2.0 SP1. So it wasn't in .net 2.0. Which explains why it is missing from > mono 2.0 > > Even if you can't make a compatible type loading method. Is it possible > to make your own non compatible xslt compiler in order to get the speed > boost. IE the point of XslCompiledTransform is to compile the xslt into > MSIL, this will then execute much faster then a XSLT interpreter. > > I guess the question is how can you implement a class with 'Compiled' in > the name using an interpreter. It's just plain misleading. If you can't > make do a 'Compiled' transform then why pretend? XslCompiledTransform > should be maked as not implemented/ throw a not implemented exception > rather then pretend its a compiled transform when its actually an > interpreter. > > As a user if I wanted an interpreted transform I would have used > XslTransform. I would rather its was obvious that mono didn't have a > compiled transform then that it appeared to all the world to have one > but actually didn't. > > OK so imagine that mono had implemented StringBuilder using normal > string concatenation. Sure it would correctly add strings together but > it wouldn't do the thing that people use it for, That is to provide an > faster more efficient method of adding strings together. Its the same > with XslCompiledTransform. People use XslCompiledTransform because its > faster, because its 'compiled'. That is its whole reason for it > existing, thats the reason why Microsoft added it rather then just > sticking with the existing XslTransform. > > If you had a XSLT Compiler you could have a fastest XSLT transformer in > linux. Our testing to date puts the .net implementation of > XslCompiledTransform significantly faster then any other method of > performing XSLT transforms on windows. It would give mono bragging > rights as well as provide a compelling reason for people doing xslt on > linux to use mono. > > Thats my 2 cents worth. > > Sincerely, > Daniel > > Atsushi Eno wrote: >> NET XslCompiledTransform has horrible design choice that there is *no* >> public API >> exposed to make compiled XSLT implementable. There is no choice for us >> to implement >> it at least from public documentation. We won't support it beyond any >> wrapper. >> >> (I feel almost no need to add this comment, but: loading stylesheet by >> compiled type is >> newer stuff than we have finished 2.0 API. Besides/anyways I don't >> really care about tiny, >> cosmetic, minor API missings like other API lands.) >> >> Atsushi Eno >> >> On 2009/09/24 14:50, Daniel Hughes wrote: >> >>> XslCompiledTransform.Load appears to only have 6 overloads where as >>> .net has 8. The two missing overloads are for loading an already >>> compiled transform from a type. These are the overloads I need. When I >>> started investigating this I also recognized that the transform on >>> mono appears to be a lot slow then it should be..... >>> >>> I have a horrible thought that XslCompiledTransfrom in mono is just a >>> wrapper for XslTransfrom and so it not compiled at all... so none of >>> the speed improvement are available. >>> >>> Please tell me this is not the case and that I am just doing something >>> wrong. XslCompiledTransfrom is a .net 2.0 libary I had heard that mono >>> had a complete implementation of .net 2.0. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Daniel Hughes >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Mono-list maillist - [email protected] >>> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mono-list maillist - [email protected] >> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Mono-list maillist - [email protected] > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list > _______________________________________________ Mono-list maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
