On Wed, 2007-01-03 at 20:11 +0000, Chris Jones wrote: > > Yikes! This is a very bad suggestion. The idea behind standards like XML is > > to have standard tools to work with them, thus eliminating repeating the > > same mistakes in every implementation. You don't go writing a new regular > > expression parser every time you need regexes do you? To answer the > > original email, there are a few XML parsers in common use out there. The > > main ones for UNIX are probably libxml and expat. > > > > http://xmlsoft.org/ (and the C++ bindings > > http://libxmlplusplus.sourceforge.net/ ) and http://expat.sourceforge.net/ > > I second that. Writting your own does not strike me as a good idea, as there > are many out there. Why waste effort re-inventing the wheel. > > Just to add another, I work on a project that uses Xerces. I don't work much > myself on the part that interacts with this directly, so I cannot say if I > recommend it or not, but it seems to work just fine in our case, which is > parsing *lots* of XML for data. > > http://xml.apache.org/xerces-c/ > ---- I don't know about xerces-c but I do know (I'm just starting to play with XML)... rpm -q --whatprovides /usr/lib/gcj/xerces-j2/xerces-j2-2.7.1.jar.so xerces-j2-2.7.1-7jpp.2 Craig
