On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 2:42 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> writes: > > Own implementation of SQL/XML generating functions like XMLFOREST or > > XMLELEMENT should not be too > > difficult. Significantly more difficult problem is parsing of XML (more > > with namespaces), although some basic > > support for XMLTABLE should not be too hard too. > > I don't think anybody really wants to roll our own XML parser. > > > Isn't possible to call Rust code from C? Then maybe there are some > > possibility from Rust world > > https://github.com/ballsteve/xrust > > Maybe. I think the fundamental problem here, similar to what we've > run into elsewhere, is that we chose a library to depend on without > thinking hard enough about whether it would be well-supported in the > long run. I see little reason to think that that risk would be less > for some random not-written-in-C implementation. If we want to > jump ship away from libxml2, we had better ask hard questions about > the new choice. > Also, libxslt depends on libxml2, and there is no maintainer now after the recent commits done to remove the existing ones: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libxslt/-/commit/c8b1ea4b89a9b81fa611f32c80f47df0c3b3b004 https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libxslt/-/commit/923903c59d668af42e3144bc623c9190a0f65988 > regards, tom lane > > > -- Sandeep Thakkar
