This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
Re: XSL/T Engine Comparisons
Steve Muench writes:
> | I can blow up Xalan and Oracle fairly easily;
>
> >From private email I know what you mean by "blow up"
> here, but others might not. It does *not* mean "crash"
> but rather "make consume a lot of memory, thus causing
> my Java VM to page, thus sending it into a fit because
> Java VM's and paging to disk don't go well in the
> same sentence".
Yes. I apologize unreservedly. When I wrote my mail, I had it in my
head that I had made Oracle crash because of a feature missing, but I
was not remembering aright. I agree, Oracle implements the spec, to
the best of my knowledge. I personally am not using oraxsl because
- it does not (yet, publicly) implement an extension for multiple
output files
- it currently wants more memory than I have
> Using your testcase and others we've worked for 2.0.2.9 on
> our memory usage so I'll hopefully have good news to report
> shortly on this front.
thats great.
I much appreciate the trouble you have taken to look at my perhaps
unreasonable test cases, and again, apologies for maligning the software!
sebastian
PS but I dont think we can let Xalan off the conformance hook. Though I
confess that I seldom try it, because xerces tells me the TEI Lite DTD
is invalid.
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list