Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
good chemistry is complicated,
and a little bit messy -LW

Re: Re^2: xml parsers: do I need one?

by exussum0 (Vicar)
on Aug 28, 2003 at 16:23 UTC ( #287433=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re^2: xml parsers: do I need one?
in thread xml parsers: do I need one?

Java is only slow on speed startup. For execution, it's not THAT much difference since hotspot (optimizing) or just the regular execution JVM's turn the byte code into a compiled program.

Play that funky music white boy..

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re^2: xml parsers: do I need one?
by zakzebrowski (Curate) on Aug 28, 2003 at 16:58 UTC
Re^4: xml parsers: do I need one?
by Aristotle (Chancellor) on Aug 28, 2003 at 17:12 UTC
    I am aware of that. Java has caught up a great deal in performance issues. Nevertheless, Java code is not as low level as C code. (char* anyone?)

    Makeshifts last the longest.

      "low level" has nothing to do w/ it. Doing things like strcmp (strncmp) isn't as efficient as java strings, since hash's comparisons MAY be faster.

      Try doing a strncmp of say, two identical 10k byte strings, but when you do a.equals(b), where a,b are strings, then doing equals() should be faster, since the hash values are calculated and compared, using specific algorithms that are prolly faster in the long term.

      Play that funky music white boy..

        What does that have to do with anything? You can write a string hashing function in C too (and I know which one I'll bet my money on). And how does this apply to writing an XML parser?

        Makeshifts last the longest.

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://287433]
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others contemplating the Monastery: (5)
As of 2022-08-16 07:20 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found