Re: [xml] xmlBuffer* vs. xmlStr*

[Daniel Veillard <veillard redhat com>]

On Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 07:34:47PM +0200, Thomas Broyer wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> When working on the libxslt implementation of EXSLT - Strings, I first used
> xmlChar and xmlStr* functions. Then I remembered there was xmlBuffer's and
> their xmlBuffer* functions.
>
> Looking at xmlXPathConcatFunction, it uses xmlStrcat.
>
> So here's the question: wouldn't it be a little bit more efficient to use
> an xmlBuffer?
> Actually, I wonder whether to switch libexslt/strings.c (particularly
> str:padding() and str:concat()) to xmlBuffer or not.

  Depends, xmlStrcat() requires a realloc(), which is a relatively fast
operation on linux but can be a real dog on other OSes.

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network http://redhat.com/products/network/
veillard redhat com  | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/