[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Internal entities removed from XML?

• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: Internal entities removed from XML?
• From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>
• Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 06:40:26 +1100
• References: <B885BEDCB3664E4AB1C72F1D85CB29F804B7C752@R...> <oprhnu8kjdezizxn@s...> <009801c2a791$8c325300$4bc8a8c0@A...> <3E021C80.60207@d...>

From: "Rich Salz" <rsalz@d...>

> Yes, you can write an optimized codepath that does this, falling back 
> (or falling over :) when it finds other entities, but it should be clear 
> that if you *never* have those things, then your code can be smaller 
> (and therefore more reliable), and faster.

It is not clear to me that it would be any faster, since it involves branches
that would never be taken if the data contained no user-defined entities.

As for code being more reliable, the metrics people AFAIK seem to
say that the benefits of small size (i.e. the removal of the risk of errors
due to code complexity) can be gained on projects of any size
by factoring your code into simple enough units (or focussing your
testing on risky sections).  It is not the absolute size but the code 
complexity that makes small systems unreliable. 

Cheers
Rick Jelliffe

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Internal entities removed from XML?
    • From: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>

• References:
  • RE: Internal entities removed from XML?
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
  • Re: Internal entities removed from XML?
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
  • Re: Internal entities removed from XML?
    • From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>
  • Re: Internal entities removed from XML?
    • From: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Internal entities removed from XML?
• Next by Date: Re: Internal entities removed from XML?
• Previous by thread: Re: Internal entities removed from XML?
• Next by thread: Re: Internal entities removed from XML?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread