xVik, We did experiment with serializing the parsed XML module definitions as POJOs (i.e. standard Java object serialization). It turned out that reading that back in was really just marginally faster than parsing the equivalent XML.
If I understand you correctly you propose compiling the module definitions to Java code (e.g. a class implementing ModuleDescriptorProvider) and in turn save that as a Java bytecode file. To do that one could use Javassist, CGLIB, etc. I have indeed thought about this idea. But I never got around implementing it. I agree with you that the XML is quite nice for defining configuration contributions for a given schema, so even with the advent of Java annotation based definitions it may be worthwhile. Let us know if you have any more concrete thoughts / ideas about this. Regards, --knut On 2/2/07, xVik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Im just curious about: why not to compile xml configuration for the production .. as i can see from my work xml its pretty good format for describing configuration.. its very human-friendly (readable) for me, xml have only one disadvataje - it takes a long time for parse im also like annotations, but in case of schemas, for example, its more pleasure to configure it in xml and small tool that will compile xml to bytecode will be the silver bullet in case of develoment pleasure what you think? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/why-not-to-production-compile-xml-tf3159231.html#a8762179 Sent from the Hivemind - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
