Subject: Re: XSL performance problem From: Nantapon Chaimunkong <b38npc@xxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 11:58:12 +0700 (GMT) |
On Tue, 18 May 1999, Scott_Boag/CAM/Lotus wrote: > I think it's a bit unfair to be judging XSL performance at this time. Both > XT and LotusXSL are documented to be not optimized yet. There are a LOT of > things to be done for optimization, and I know both James and myself (and > other processors like XSL:P) have these optimizations in our plans. I > think you'll be pleased at how fast XSL can become. But right now > stability and draft supporting features come first. > > Remember how early in the game it is -- XSL is not yet a recommended > standard, and the last draft brought radical change to the expression > syntax. > > -scott > Can you share with us what optimization is expected in the future release of xsl processor? Some members of the list mention tenfold improvement. I think 3x(of December draft's xt - I haven't timed the new xt.) improvement is hardly possible as I thinks xt is at least partially-optimized. I've also made an xsl processor and tried to optimize it a lot. It still does not go near xt. I've also found that the JVM ,suiting for (some) xsl processors, is microsoft jview. The new hotspot is very disappointing. Nantapon. XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: XSL performance problem, Tyler Baker | Thread | RE: XSL performance problem, Sebastien Sahuc |
RE: XML and ASP, Vun Kannon, David | Date | cyrillic support, xsl-list |
Month |