On 25 Jul 2005, at 13:42, Christoph Theis wrote:
Anyway, John Wilson will be the one who can judge my idea as he is the only one who really understands the parser. I will let it up to him to decide if its really a bug and how to patch it.
Why does XMLRPC have its own XML parser and serializer? I've been lurking on the list and have seen bug reports against both. From my outsider's perspective, these components seem unnecessary. It's tricky to write high-performance, bug-free parsers and serializers. Fortunately, other people have already done it. What's different enough about XMLRPC that it can't take advantage of that?
Actually, I should ask "why isn't it just using standard JAXP for parsing and serialization?" It looks like the parser at least can be overridden by passing in a class name of a SAX1 driver. But I don't understand why one is bundled or why there's a hash table of a lot of implementations and explicit class loading, except maybe for historical reasons. If I sent in a patch to change this, would it be accepted?
Regards, Scott -- Scott Lamb <http://www.slamb.org/>
