In the README file, Sean says that REXML is ‘reasonably fast’, so I
guess it’s not as fast as it could be. So I was wondering: since C is so
portable, and creating Ruby extensions in C is most of the times pretty
trivial, why isn’t REXML implemented (at least parts of it) that way? I
guess one of the reasons Sean would invoke would be that we’ll lose
portability: is that so? It seems that many standard Ruby extensions are
built that whay, so why isn’t REXML, too? At least, we could fork a new
project and try to implement speed critical parts of code in C, I assume
that would bring some serious performance improvements. Anyway, in a
month or so I’ll have alot of spare time, so with Sean’s help, I’ll be
more than happy to try a C implementation of this great parser, while
keeping the excellent API the same. What do you say?
This e-mail was scanned by RAV AntiVirus!
Xnet scaneaza automat toate mesajele impotriva virusilor folosind RAV AntiVirus.
Xnet automatically scans all messages for viruses using RAV AntiVirus.
Nota: RAV AntiVirus poate sa nu detecteze toti virusii noi sau toate variantele lor. Va rugam sa luati in considerare ca exista un risc de fiecare data cand deschideti fisiere atasate si ca MobiFon nu este responsabila pentru nici un prejudiciu cauzat de virusi.
Disclaimer: RAV AntiVirus may not be able to detect all new viruses and variants. Please be aware that there is a risk involved whenever opening e-mail attachments to your computer and that MobiFon is not responsible for any damages caused by viruses.