RE: hardware xml / xslt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Michael Kay
> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 2:31 AM
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE:  hardware xml / xslt
>
>
> > I don't know, I recently saw some benchmarks for xalan(c++
> > version) running against large(10+ mb) xml files and it
> > performed worst out of the processors involved, msxml
> > performed best(can't remember where I read this). I suppose
> > one reason for datapower's product would be that it handles
> > large xml files quickly, in that context and if xalan indeed
> > does perform poorly against large files it does not seem to
> > be a good comparison.
> >
> Hey, you wouldn't expect them to compare themselves against the *best*
> of the competition, would you? This is a US software company, after all,
> not a team of gentleman cricket players.

Who is the fastest, Mike? Caucho's Resin? libxml/xsl? It is not Saxon. Who do
you think they should use?

*Everybody* seems to use Xalan as the baseline because it is blessed by Apache
and SUN.

I think you are a brilliant man, Mike, but this was a dickless statement. I
don't need to hear US-bashing on this list too.

-Rob


>
> Michael Kay
> Software AG
> home: Michael.H.Kay@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> work: Michael.Kay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list



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