XOM API for Processing XML with Java

[Christof <csad7 AT t-online.de>]

My co-worker did a very small test saying XOM 1.0 did take about 10% 
more time to load/build/etc the document he tested it with. Of course 
this is not a real performance test but thats what he went with.
I too doubt dom4j will be much faster but they are accustomed to it and 
there should be not disadvantages by changing (advantages I see in XOMs 
focus on correctnes. Simplicity for me is a big advantage too but I 
myself did not use dom4j before).

But I was wondering if XOM 1.1 will be a lot faster in some areas after 
the discussions about performance optimizations on this list. Being only 
a moderate I was not following everything in detail but had the 
impression 1.1 should be much more optimized, is that true? When is 1.1 
expected as a final version?

thanks
Christof


Wolfgang Hoschek wrote:
> Would be interesting. I'm not aware of such a thorough study. Having  
> said that, I'd be somewhat surprised if they were more efficient. It  
> probably also depends on the main usage pattern.
>
> Wolfgang.
>
> On Jul 22, 2005, at 2:04 AM, csad7 AT t-online.de wrote:
>
> > hello,
> > are there any performance comparisons between lets say XOM and
> > dom4j/JDOM etc?
> >
> > I try to persuade some colleges at work to use XOM instead of dom4j
> > (which has bitten some projects with some nasty details mostly issues
> > about whitespace handling) but they question the performance of XOM.
> >
> > Googling did not bring any real help, so I'd think I'll ask here...
> >
> > thanks a lot
> > christof
> > _______________________________________________
> > XOM-interest mailing list
> > XOM-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/xom-interest