On Feb 27, 2011, at 11:23 AM, Tom Lane wrote:

> Well, that's why I asked --- if it's going to be a huge chunk of code,
> then I agree this is the wrong path to pursue.  However, I do feel that
> libxml pretty well sucks, so if we could replace it with a relatively
> small amount of code, that might be the right thing to do.

I think that XML parsers must be hard to get really right, because of all those 
I've used in Perl, XML::LibXML is far and away the best. Its docs suck, but it 
does the work really well.

> No, because the xpath stuff is fundamentally broken, and nobody seems to
> know how to make libxslt do what we actually need.  See the open bugs
> on the TODO list.

XPath is broken? I use it heavily in the Perl module Test::XPath and now, in 
PostgreSQL, with my explanation extension.


Is this something I need to worry about?



Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to