ElementTree vs. lxml (python XML libraries)
Shahms King
shahms at shahms.com
Thu May 12 20:59:04 UTC 2005
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Daniel Veillard wrote:
| On Thu, May 12, 2005 at 12:34:44PM -0400, John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
|
|>This is just an exploratory e-mail as I don't know all the issues
|>involved and don't want to get into a flamewar if someone has strong
|>opinions on either side.
|>
|>I have been looking at what library to use for parsing the XML content
|>in the dbus python bindings. Suggestions were to use lxml
|
|
| why not libxml2 python bindings directly ? At least if you have a
| problem I know the full stack there.
|
| Daniel
|
This is just a summary from the last time this dicussion came up, some
of the details may be incorrect. I happen to like libxml2 and would try
to fix these problems "If I Only Had The Time".
1. The bindings are very un-pythonic. The biggest wart off the top of
~ my head is that you have to manually free the document. The lxml
~ wrapper is an attempt to fix this problem.
2. "They are slow". As much as libxml2 is usually faster than expat,
~ but something about how the python bindings deal with strings makes
~ libxml2 slower in this case.
There may have been a third, but those two are the biggest problems that
I remember. As for lxml not implementing the "iterparse" interface, I'd
need to look into it more, but I'm pretty sure lxml could use libxml's
XmlTextReader interface to implement this...
- --
Shahms E. King <shahms at shahms.com>
Multnomah ESD
Public Key:
http://shahms.mesd.k12.or.us/~sking/shahms.asc
Fingerprint:
1612 054B CE92 8770 F1EA AB1B FEAB 3636 45B2 D75B
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFCg8OY/qs2NkWy11sRArYQAKCTxp1tu7pF4BJm5HX8VImXwX1X2ACglyX8
ChyrWxymMEGmo32oH1ElHV0=
=hbGR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list