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

Re: Piccolo Java SAX parser and others in the wild?

• To: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
• Subject: Re: Piccolo Java SAX parser and others in the wild?
• From: Dennis Sosnoski <dms@s...>
• Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 10:27:44 -0800
• Cc: Jeff Rafter <lists@j...>, xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <p06010204bc5e7fd9b1cb@[192.168.254.4]>
• References: <01b201c3f95a$4a6e47a0$6403a8c0@ARIMATHEA> <p06010204bc5e7fd9b1cb@[192.168.254.4]>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312

Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:

>At 7:41 AM -0800 2/22/04, Jeff Rafter wrote:
>  
>
>>Has anyone used or seen the Piccolo [1] SAX parser out in the wild. It
>>claims to be the fastest SAX parser available (and was for awhile packaged
>>with SAXBench a benchmarking software). It is not listed anywhere on the SAX
>>project's homepage but likely should be. It seems to be the only free, java,
>>SAX2 parser I haven't seen listed on the site. In the dmoz [2] listing there
>>were a few others, but they were other non-freeware, or non-SAX2
>>
>>    
>>
>
>Piccolo is not sufficiently conformant to the XML standard to be 
>considered for serious work. It also appears to have been abandoned 
>by its developer. In Java, pretty much the only open source parser 
>worth considering these days is Xerces. The Oracle parser is only a 
>little worse, but is not open source. These are the only  two 
>reasonably non-buggy XML parsers for Java that are in active 
>development at the current time that I know of. If anyone knows of 
>any others, I'd love to hear about them. (Note the criteria: 
>non-buggy and actively developed. I know of half a dozen other 
>parsers that fail these criteria.)
>
Can you mention what the main flaws are for Piccolo? I've seen a number 
of companies using it, and from what I remember it's also the basis of 
the parser used by BEA's NetBeans (now part of Apache, so that may be 
changing). Many people would consider BEA's main XML infrastructure 
project to be serious work. :-)

Piccolo was considerably faster than the Xerces version in use at the 
time it first came out, but the Xerces team seems to have put more of a 
focus on performance since then. Recent versions of Xerces look to be 
about on a par with Piccolo performance.

  - Dennis

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Piccolo Java SAX parser and others in the wild?
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• References:
  • Piccolo Java SAX parser and others in the wild?
    • From: "Jeff Rafter" <lists@j...>
  • Re: Piccolo Java SAX parser and others in the wild?
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: RDDL: Can we add a "copyright" version
• Next by Date: Re: SAX Topic 2004-0002: XML 1.1 support
• Previous by thread: Pull Parsing, was Re: Piccolo Java SAX parser and othersin the wild?
• Next by thread: Re: Piccolo Java SAX parser and others in the wild?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread