Developer forums (C::B DEVELOPMENT STRICTLY!) > Development

tinyxml

<< < (2/2)

MortenMacFly:

--- Quote from: thomas on May 29, 2013, 12:46:06 am ---On a different note, if you feel like playing around with TinyXML, there is TinyXML2 available in the mean time. Same author, slightly different, but similar API, and allegedly much more efficient and smaller. Though I've not had time to test it.

--- End quote ---
I am using it already in other projects (and even already contributed a tiny piece to the source ;-)). Its very neat, hence has (for me) one major drawback: You cannot pinpoint an error to a line in the XML file. For our purposes its not very nice, case you'll be not able to tell the user where in the config file the error occurred. That's also why I left the C::B SDK untouched so far.

Jenna:
I loaded a nearly 1GB Valgrind xml-file (C::B run) with 9099 and 9120 and the time needed to load is nearly the same (about 50 sec), memory footprint for 9120 is a little bit larger (7.4 GB against 7.2 GB not swappable memory, 8.6 GB against 8.6 GB virtual memory).
After searching for "test" in all *.cpp, *.h amd *.xml files (including the 1 GB Valgrind-file) both use 14.1/14.1 and 12.6/12.8 GB (same difference to just loaded xml file as before).
While searching they used up to 18.5 GB of memory and that will surely break systems with less real memory (32 GB).

The fact that so much memory is in use after the search is probably a problem.

But I do not see a sigificant difference in both revisions (with and without use of STL-string in tinyxml).

oBFusCATed:

--- Quote from: jens on May 30, 2013, 06:30:20 pm ---But I do not see a sigificant difference in both revisions (with and without use of STL-string in tinyxml).

--- End quote ---
I don't think ThreadSearch is using tinyxml, during searching. I think that it opens an editor, so the used memory is coming from Scintilla.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page