• To: "Karl Waclawek" <karl@w...>
• Subject: Re: genx - consensus items
• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 12:39:11 -0800
• Cc: <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <000c01c3e1df$2d7b0760$9e539696@citkwaclaww2k>
• References: <0E36FD96D96FCA4AA8E8F2D199320E52CAC278@R...> <B702227A-4DD0-11D8-B206-000A95A51C9E@t...> <000c01c3e1df$2d7b0760$9e539696@citkwaclaww2k>

On Jan 23, 2004, at 10:31 AM, Karl Waclawek wrote:
>> In genx, the only significant string comparison is checking for dupe
>> attributes (I think; haven't written the code yet).  Since you only
>> check each one once, the cost of doing an intern() (what I assume you
>> mean by atomize) is probably higher than just doing the string
>> comparison. -Tim
>
> What algorithm are you using?

Well, since I want genx to generate canonical XML, I'm going to have to 
sort the atttributes anyhow, and avoiding premature optimization, I'm 
just gonna collect 'em and do a qsort() and then do an O(N)*strcmp run 
through.  I can think of lots of clever ways to optimize this if it 
produces measurable overhead. -Tim

smime.p7s

• References:
  • RE: genx - consensus items
    • From: "Joshua Allen" <joshuaa@m...>
  • Re: genx - consensus items
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
  • Re: genx - consensus items
    • From: "Karl Waclawek" <karl@w...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Fruitbasket schema question for both W3C/RelaxNG
• Next by Date: Re: Fruitbasket schema question for both W3C/RelaxNG
• Previous by thread: Re: genx - consensus items
• Next by thread: Fruitbasket schema question for both W3C/RelaxNG
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread