Re^4: XML::Fling begone?


We don't bite newbies here... much
	PerlMonks

Re^4: XML::Fling begone?

by Aristotle (Chancellor)

on Dec 19, 2004 at 18:04 UTC ( [id://416025]=note: print w/replies, xml )

Need Help??

in reply to Re^3: XML::Fling begone?
in thread XML::Fling begone?

I know — that's why I tossed this thought out first before I sunk any time into the idea at all. What I'm asking is, do you think it is at all worthwhile to look into this (let alone do it)?

Makeshifts last the longest.

Comment on Re^4: XML::Fling begone?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: XML::Fling begone? by demerphq (Chancellor) on Dec 19, 2004 at 18:06 UTC
As I said before, it would have to be a lot faster, and solve some problem that we have with XML:Fling to be worthwhile. If the benchmarks showed a signifigant time difference then id say at minimum further research would be warranted. --- demerphq	[reply]
Re^6: XML::Fling begone? by Aristotle (Chancellor) on Dec 19, 2004 at 18:11 UTC
Ok then, I'll add benchmarking the two vs each other to my TODO. Any suggestions on how to benchmark? I'm thinking I should lift the code from some ticker generator and create an XML::Genx-adapted version to pit against it. Makeshifts last the longest.	[reply]
Re^7: XML::Fling begone? by demerphq (Chancellor) on Dec 19, 2004 at 18:14 UTC
Id say grab the RSS output of the NN ticker and then have the benchmark recreate it with both. Something like that. I wouldnt use live code to start with as I reckon the DB times will swamp the XML production time. I say to use that feed as its probably fairly sizable. --- demerphq	[reply]

In Section Inner Scriptorium

Log In^?

Domain Nodelet^?

www.com | www.net | www.org

Node Status^?

node history
Node Type: note [id://416025]
help

Chatterbox^?

How do I use this? • Last hour • Other CB clients

Other Users^?

Others exploiting the Monastery: (5)

As of 2024-04-19 13:59 GMT

Sections^?

Information^?

Find Nodes^?

Leftovers^?

Today I Learned

Voting Booth^?

No recent polls found