Subject: RE: ANN: XSLBench - XSLT Processor Benchmark From: Sebastian Rahtz <sebastian.rahtz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 11:07:59 +0100 |
Kevin Jones writes: > different JVM options over the next day or so. Perhaps the next stage is a > XSLT performance competition? It's hard to start a competition until all the processors actually implement the spec. If I write a stylesheet that solves a problem efficiently using keys, I cannot run it using eg XT. Someone could rewrite the thing without using keys, but then it becomes a programming competition. Of course, I agree that people should be allowed to tweak the *environment* of a test, by compiling stylesheets, changing memory setups or whatever, but allowing people to rewrite a stylesheet so that it exercises the best features of their implementation seems mildly pointless. If the conclusion is "product XXX recommends you not to use xsl:number because it is implemented badly", then I am depressed. Anyway, a judicious set of discrete tests will reveal that for us. Sebastian XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: ANN: XSLBench - XSLT Processor , Kevin Jones | Thread | RE: ANN: XSLBench - XSLT Processor , Lee Goddard |
re: xsl stylesheet for shares table, Kevin Byrne | Date | linking in XML, Knut Alboldt |
Month |