Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add: New XML file iterator for large list-like XML #808

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 5, 2024

Conversation

timopollmeier
Copy link
Member

What

This adds functions and data type for iterating over subelements in an XML file at a given tree depth without having to keep the object model (DOM) of the whole document in memory.

Why

This is useful for handling larger list-like XML documents like the CPE dictionary.

References

GEA-488

@timopollmeier timopollmeier requested a review from a team as a code owner March 1, 2024 10:13
This adds functions and data type for iterating over subelements in
an XML file at a given tree depth without having to keep the object
model (DOM) of the whole document in memory.

This is useful for handling larger list-like XML documents like the CPE
dictionary.
util/xmlutils.c Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
util/xmlutils.c Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
util/xmlutils.c Show resolved Hide resolved
util/xmlutils.c Show resolved Hide resolved
util/xmlutils.c Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
It is now checked if the parser context was created successfully
when initializing or rewinding an iterator.
The word 'pcdata' in comments is replaced with 'cdata' as this appears
to be a typo in the original libxml.
@timopollmeier timopollmeier force-pushed the add-xml-file-iterator branch from 53d43bc to e3beb48 Compare March 5, 2024 14:12
@timopollmeier timopollmeier merged commit 3431a98 into main Mar 5, 2024
9 of 10 checks passed
@timopollmeier timopollmeier deleted the add-xml-file-iterator branch March 5, 2024 14:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants