[erlang-questions] Not an Erlang fan
Sun Sep 23 20:39:22 CEST 2007
On Sep 23, 2007, at 10:20 AM, Thomas Lindgren wrote:
> My own experience with parsing XML in Erlang vs Ruby
> is that xmerl parsing about 4 MB of XML handily beat
> "the obvious" Ruby library the other guy used
> (REXML?), being 10+ times faster or more -- xmerl
> needed 10 seconds versus "a few minutes" for Ruby. So
> I wouldn't say Erlang is inherently slow w.r.t.
> parsing, but again, one may need some experience to
> get it right.
Ruby is known to be very slow. REXML is a pure Ruby XML parser. It's
the slowest XML parser I've ever used.
You've set the bar too low for xmerl to pass. :-) Now, if xmerl
beats a C XML parser, I'd be impressed. :-)
More information about the erlang-questions