[phobos] Community shout-out?

[Masahiro Nakagawa]

On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 00:10:08 +0900, SHOO <zan77137 at nifty.com> wrote:

> LOL! This is terrible!
>
> The performance is not so important for me, but this report moves me to  
> tears.

I agree. The most important of XML is human readable and structured format.
I never use XML in performance needed situation.
I want efficient memory management and usable APIs.

Of course, faster implementation is good :)

> What is a bottleneck?
>
> --
> SHOO
>
> (2010/11/14 21:55), Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> A benchmark has shown that the Tango XML module is a lot faster than  
>> many of the XML libraries out there, specially than the Phobos module.  
>> So I would say that D could do better than other libraries at least  
>> when it comes to speed.
>>
>> http://dotnot.org/blog/archives/2008/03/10/xml-benchmarks-updated-graphs-with-rapidxml/
>>
>> On 14 nov 2010, at 10:44, Russel Winder wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 2010-11-14 at 15:35 +0900, SHOO wrote:
>>>> About a problem of std.xml.
>>>
>>> Potentially n00b comment but . . .
>>>
>>> The Python community seem to be giving up on having their own library
>>> for processing XML and are using bindings to libxml2 and libxslt.  Is  
>>> it
>>> likely that a D source XML library can do better than libxml2 and
>>> libxslt or might it be better just to create a D idiomatic binding?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Russel.
>>> =============================================================================
>>> Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip:  
>>> sip:russel.winder at ekiga.net
>>> 41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel at russel.org.uk
>>> London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> phobos mailing list
>>> phobos at puremagic.com
>>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>>
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos