From koffice-devel Tue Aug 31 14:31:29 2004 From: Thomas Zander Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:31:29 +0000 To: koffice-devel Subject: Re: Why is KSpread such a memory hog - analysis Message-Id: <200408311631.35892.zander () kde ! org> X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=koffice-devel&m=109396276502875 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 30 August 2004 20:27, \"shaheed r. haque\" wrote: > Quoting Thomas Zander : > > > This sounds a lot like a job for SAX? > > > > SAX is much worse to program correctly and with the solution I gave > > you still have the DOM tree. > > I should have been clearer: I meant "one could implement your idea > using SAX" (the Xerces-C++ implementation, for example). The point > being that SAX has all the funky support for encodings and whatnot > that a standalone implementation would inevitably need to recreate. Indeed; but that does make it an order of magnitude more complex; which might not be what you want. > P.S. Also, it might just be worth deferring the creation of the > QStrings until really needed? I don't think that is a good idea memory wise; QStrings share their string implicitly which (should) mean less memory allocated for repeating element-names. I have no idea how much bytes a QString brings as overhead. It surely is faster to keep a char* for as long as possible though.. - -- Thomas Zander -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFBNIvHCojCW6H2z/QRAka4AKDRMXqEQKUZjahRbhz10YdXIZGXFwCfSAo3 F6fMeclFAhNHFifIzJxEusQ= =OesD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ koffice-devel mailing list koffice-devel@mail.kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel