I have not looked at the proposed changes. The question here is what do people want. We had a version of DOM that used reference counting [1] which is currently deprecated. People were complaining about how the the DOM was very slow. The new DOM design was introduced with performance in mind, and I think that we should keep it that way. DOM is memory intensive by nature and I am not for adding more weight to the existing DOM that makes it slower.
Just my 2 cents worth... Khaled [1] http://xml.apache.org/xerces-c/program-deprecateddom.html "Bagepalli, Kiran" wrote: > For the question at hand: It turns out that it might actually be useful > >> to > >> have a 2.3 release come out reasonably soon (early-mid May) because some > >> fairly important features should be in by then (most importantly, a > scheme > >> to enable users to have the parser get memory from their own heap rather > >> than from the system). Since this should make us substantially more > >> robust > >> in environments which have this capability, it might be good to have a > >> stable release for people to use sooner rather than later. > > <Kiran> Is this happening in 2.3. This will be a big boost to DOM which is a > memory hog. This would enable > users to spool DOM content to disk and not be limited by system memory. > Kiran > > -----Original Message----- > From: James Berry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 10:14 AM > To: Xerces C Dev > Cc: Urs Muff; 'Neil Graham' > Subject: Re: Adding RefCount support to DOMNode (was Next release) > > I'd like to solicit comment from other committers and stakeholders about > this proposed patch. If people agree, I'm happy to commit it. > > The basic question is: > > - Is it proper/okay to add several additional "experimental" interfaces > to the DOMNode class that will enable use of reference counting in derived > or alternate DOM implementations that want to work with Xerces? Such > additional interfaces can be marked experimental, and will have no impact on > Xerces mainline peformance. > > The benefit of this is: > > - Groups, such as Quark, can use alternate or derived DOM classes in > conjunction with Xerces. In the absence of this change, they are unable to > do so. > > I went over several interfaces with Urs to try to make this as broadly > applicable as possible without affecting Xerces out of the box. But the > question still remains: is it right to add such experimental interfaces to > the base Xerces DOMNode? Personally, I think it adds value in terms of > supporting additional DOM flavors... > > Comments? Consensus? > > James. > > On 4/3/03 9:06 AM, "Urs Muff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Could you please look into the feature (including solution) proposed in > bug > > #17945? We would really appreciate, if we at least had an answer if it > ever > > will be considered to be included, and if yes, what the timeframe would > be. > > > > The feature allows custom implementation of DOMNode interface to enable > > reference counting over nodes (and thus their early disposal). > > > > We worked closely with James Berry on that solution, and we hope that it > has > > a low impact and will be accepted. > > > > Kindest regards, > > > > - URS C. MUFF > > SYSTEMS ARCHITECT - RESEARCH LAB > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] - X6360 > > +1 (303) 894 3360 > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Neil Graham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 9:57 AM > >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Subject: Re: Next release > >> > >> Hi David, Gareth and all, > >> > >> One of the things I'm hoping to do in the next week or so is to share a > >> list of the work items that the folks from IBM are planning to focus on > in > >> the next while, including when we thought it might be nice to have a > >> release. This way, I'm hoping other folks (committers and not) can step > >> forward, volunteer for things, and we can put together a decent plan. > >> That > >> way, we'll all have a much firmer idea of what the next release will > >> entail > >> and when it will come out. > >> > >> For the question at hand: It turns out that it might actually be useful > >> to > >> have a 2.3 release come out reasonably soon (early-mid May) because some > >> fairly important features should be in by then (most importantly, a > scheme > >> to enable users to have the parser get memory from their own heap rather > >> than from the system). Since this should make us substantially more > >> robust > >> in environments which have this capability, it might be good to have a > >> stable release for people to use sooner rather than later. > >> > >> Anyway, that's a preview of some of the things we're looking into over > >> here; more details (and lots of opportunity for discussion!) to follow > >> soonish. > >> > >> Cheers! > >> Neil > >> Neil Graham > >> XML Parser Development > >> IBM Toronto Lab > >> Phone: 905-413-3519, T/L 969-3519 > >> E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> |---------+----------------------------> > >> | | David Schulze | > >> | | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]| > >> | | om> | > >> | | | > >> | | 04/03/2003 10:10 | > >> | | AM | > >> | | Please respond to| > >> | | xerces-c-dev | > >> | | | > >> |---------+----------------------------> > >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------| > >> | > >> | > >> | To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <xerces-c- > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> | > >> | cc: > >> | > >> | Subject: Next release > >> | > >> | > >> | > >> | > >> | > >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------| > >> > >> > >> > >> Anyone know a more solid date than "Fall 2003" for the next release of > >> Xerces? It would be version 2.3.0 > >> I'm planning on updating our code base from 1.7.0, but if 2.3.0 is coming > >> in > >> a few weeks I'll wait for that instead of going to 2.2.0. > >> > >> Thanks > >> David Schulze > >> DeLorme Mapping > >> Yarmouth, ME, USA > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -- > /********************************** > James D. Berry > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > vox:503.265.1213 fax:503.222.3020 > **********************************/ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
