> On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 13:18:38 +0100,
> Titus von der Malsburg (TvdM) wrote:
> Hi list,
> I'm using the package XML to create a simple XML document.
> Unfortunately constructing the XML tree is extremely slow. My code
> (see below) adds only about 100 nodes per second on an Intel
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 6:43 PM, Milan Bouchet-Valat wrote:
> Doesn't sound so bad to me. I don't think you'll find a use case where
> 3s will really be a problem.
Actually I have exactly such a case because I have to produce many
such documents and a difference of two orders of magnitude in
proc
Le vendredi 10 février 2012 à 17:36 +0100, Titus von der Malsburg a
écrit :
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Milan Bouchet-Valat
> wrote:
> > Le vendredi 10 février 2012 à 13:18 +0100, Titus von der Malsburg a
> > écrit :
> > Just a guess, but I'd try creating all 'Marker' nodes first, storing
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Milan Bouchet-Valat wrote:
> Le vendredi 10 février 2012 à 13:18 +0100, Titus von der Malsburg a
> écrit :
> Just a guess, but I'd try creating all 'Marker' nodes first, storing
> them in a 'markers' list, and then calling addChildren(markernode,
> kids=markers).
Le vendredi 10 février 2012 à 13:18 +0100, Titus von der Malsburg a
écrit :
> Hi list,
>
> I'm using the package XML to create a simple XML document.
> Unfortunately constructing the XML tree is extremely slow. My code
> (see below) adds only about 100 nodes per second on an Intel i5
> machine.
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Friedrich Leisch wrote:
> Have you considered simply writing the XML using standard functions
> like cat() and friends? That can be much faster than creating an XML
> object and writing that out (have just done that to write exams into
> our e-learning platform via
