Request for Discussion: SAX 1.0 in C++

roddey at roddey at
Mon Dec 20 19:31:21 GMT 1999

>> > 2) We would prefer that all data come out of the SAX interfaces as
>> > raw wchar_t strings. This is the most flexible mechanism and does
>> > not lock people into using any particular implementation of a string
>> > object. It also has the highest potential performance for those
>> > folks who never need to put it into anything more formal than a raw
>> > array.
>> std::basic_string<> _is_ a modern service of C++, and a pretty good
>> one from an API point of view.
>> Personally I say: use std::basic_string<> and death to all other
>> string representations in C++.
>Agreed. I don't see why you need to obviate the C++ standard library
>string. If it's that bad, upgrade your compiler environment (e.g.
>Windows) or install an entirely new one (e.g. STLport and the like).

Well, if you want to take on the job of convincing our very large and
important customers that they have to do this, then I'll go along with your
proposal. Otherwise, I can't. And I don't think that they will. They have
some crufty old compilers and we have to support them, unfortunately. Many
of them do not have any namespace support at all.

And, as I said before, for those of us who are building an XML parser on
top of a comprehensive framework, this is a non-starter because the whole
point of those frameworks are to replace the standard C++ library, which is
pretty poor as a comprehensive development framework.

Dean Roddey
Software Weenie
IBM Center for Java Technology - Silicon Valley
roddey at

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at
Archived as: and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list