Alternatives to browsers (was Re: Alternatives to the W3C)
Thomas B. Passin
tpassin at idsonline.com
Thu Jan 20 02:57:28 GMT 2000
David Brownell wrote:
> Steinar Bang wrote:
> > >>>>> "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin at idsonline.com>:
> > > XML (and, say, XML-RPC) is much lighter-weight than CORBA
> > Hm... that really depends on your definition of "lighter-weight"...
> Indeed. The first implementation of IIOP was a little engine
> I wrote, which I seem to recall compiled to about 5Kb on an x86.
> That's client and server side, both -- all you needed to interop
> with another IIOP engine (a.k.a ORB). And yes, it was faster
> than any commercial product I remember hearing about, not just
> smaller than them. I remember noticing when I hit the sweet spot
> to get have the core engine stay inside that little cache on the
> 486 CPU ... there's nothing like such an observation for an XML
> I don't recall seeing an XML parser that small, much less one
[Sorry - I just couldn't resist :) ]
> that also embedded the networking support. On the other hand,
> CORBA vendors also add their own share of glop to the mix, so
> things tend to even out.
> - Dave
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ or CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
Please note: New list subscriptions now closed in preparation for transfer to OASIS.
More information about the Xml-dev