RE: EZ/X Speed:

Kay Michael writes:
 > I haven't got many of my stylesheets to run successfully under EZ/X, most of
 > them are failing with an array bounds exception, but for what it's worth, I
 > did run the 800k dictionary sample, and it took 25 seconds with EZ/X against
 > 14 seconds with SAXON and about 4 seconds with xt. This was a very crude
 > measurement running in each case from the command line. I've they're going
 > to use speed as their unique selling point they've got their work cut out.

EZ/X had not endeared itself to me by making me redo all my document() 
and xsl:import calls as fully-specified URLs; but when (just before it 
died saying it could not find a named template) it took:

{<xsl:apply-templates
select="document('plan.xml')/svg/@width"/>
<xsl:text>}{</xsl:text> <xsl:apply-templates
select="document('plan.xml')/svg/@height"/>}

and wrote out

{3194.056566<?width 3194.056566?>}{1102.158275<?height 1102.158275?>}

I think I feel justified in abandoning my experiments until they have
a more conformant release...

"Our initial test results suggest that our XML Parser and XSL
Processor are industry leading in speed and robustness"

which makes me wonder what James Clark's sales pitch would look like
if he ever bothered  to write one! Just how does JC do it? can we buy
it in a bottle?

Sebastian


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list