At 08:17 AM 7/25/01 -0500, Weiqi Gao wrote:
>Unfortunately, there is no faster XSL-FO transformers that we can
>substitute FOP with (the eval version of The Other FO processor---I
>don't want to mention names to make you cross either---seems to be even
>slower than FOP at certain inputs).
Feel fr
On 25 Jul 2001 16:44:47 +1000, Darren Munt wrote:
>
> As an interim measure, we decided to produce the FO file separately
> with another parser (I wont tell you which one, it will only make you
> cross)
We'll make wild guesses and get cross anyway. You are using MSXML,
right? :) [No need to an
Arved Sandstrom wrote:
>
>
> Failing that, if we are talking about compiling with javac or Jikes or
> whatever, you are left with compiled bytecode, and for that we have to have
> a JVM. No ifs and buts. So then the avenue of inquiry leads down looking at
> the Invocation API in JNI.
Although
> My confidence level of being able to transition FOP to COM myself is very
> low. It would be really nice if someone would take this on :) Or maybe I'm
> just being lazy.
You said earlier that Cocoon worked for you but you dropped it because
it used an older version of FOP. Did you look at C
>One thing to be careful of is, who is doing the talking about
>compiling Java classes as COM components? Whenever I have run
>across references to doing this, it's been about using MS Visual
>J++ to compile the Java.
Of course, the talking has mostly been done by Microsoft. They want to be
al
At 07:27 PM 7/24/01 +1000, Darren Munt wrote:
>I'm aware that it is possible to compile java classes as COM components, but
>even if I knew where to start on this, I'm not sure it would help much. The
>cocoon approach was looking good for us, but we discovered that the version
>of FOP that is inst
Jeremias,
>That's because you're starting a new VM for every document you're
>creating. First the VM is started (expensive operation), then all
>classes have to be loaded which also takes a long time. Processing in
>Cocoon was faster because all FOP classes were already loaded after the
>first ca
> I've noticed a bit of chat on the list the last few days concerning
> performance. I'm having a few problems in that area and I wondered if anyone
> had any suggestions. I have a 16 page document, consisting of text and
> embedded images, which is presently taking 30 seconds to generate. I've
>
