Hi!
Sorry I was wrong,
when doing it properly (caching everything that can be
cached, and using the Translet), xsltc performs much better
than xalan (twice faster in my examples), and even a bit
better than Saxon.
Couldn't you show send me the code ?
The following was used in benchmarks:
Hi!
Sorry I was wrong,
when doing it properly (caching everything that can be cached, and
using the Translet), xsltc performs much better than xalan (twice
faster in my examples), and even a bit better than Saxon.
Couldn't you show send me the code ?
Hi again guys, sorry for 'show
Sorry I was wrong,
when doing it properly (caching everything that can be cached, and using
the Translet),
xsltc performs much better than xalan (twice faster in my examples), and
even a bit
better than Saxon.
But, when using it as a normal transformer (Template instead of Translet)
both of them
Hi!
That would youi say about xslt benchmarks on http://www.sarvega.com/ ?
xsltc is rated even worse then xalanj itself...
Still no reply. Comments anyone ? I wonder that was the cause of
such perfomance of xsltc in those tests - tests themselves, or
particular
misfeatures of xsltc triggered
:
|
| Subject: RE: interesting benchmarks
On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, MikhailFedotov wrote:
Hi!
That would youi say about xslt benchmarks on http://www.sarvega.com/ ?
xsltc is rated even worse then xalanj itself...
Still no reply. Comments anyone ? I wonder that was the cause of
such perfomance of xsltc in those tests - tests
: vendredi 15 novembre 2002 12:05
Objet : RE: interesting benchmarks
| On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, MikhailFedotov wrote:
|
| Hi!
|
| That would youi say about xslt benchmarks on http://www.sarvega.com/ ?
|
| xsltc is rated even worse then xalanj itself...
|
| Still no reply. Comments anyone ? I
