[jdom-interest] Re: JDOM Extension for Java Object (de)serialization

Mike.Brenner mikeb at mitre.org
Wed Feb 15 08:05:08 PST 2006

Could I also see that source code?

Matthias Basler wrote:
> Tatu Saloranta wrote:
>> Hi Matthias! I think it's good that you had a chance
>> to have a look at what others have done in the area.
> Yes. Object binding/serialization is really one of the fields where every
> developer has it's very specific goals and priorities. Probably this explains
> why there are so many APIs around.
>> One thing I was wondering was that, as nice as JDom
>> is, many/most data binding packages actually work
>> directly on streaming parsers. Do you have specific
>> need to have the full in-memory tree for binding, or
>> is that just for convenience? Just curious, since
>> in-memory tree does consume quite a bit of memory; and
>> it's mostly warranted if you are planning to reflect
>> changes back and fort. So maybe you plan on reflecting
>> changes between the jdom tree and objects
>> synchronously?
> Very simple answer: I actually prevent JDOM from building a complete JDOM tree
> in memory for exactly the reason you mention. So you might wonder why I use
> JDOM at all, if I don't want an in-memory tree? Simply for convenience! The
> JDOM "Element class" is so convenient (in comparison to handling SAX events),
> and this makes it easy to write bindings, i.e. conversion routines between the
> specific Java objects and the "Element"s.
> See the documentation in the source code (Which I sent) for details.
> Matthias Basler
> c9bama at uni-jena.de

More information about the jdom-interest mailing list