May 26, 2006
8:14 a.m.
On Fri, 2006-05-26 at 10:00 +0200, Stefan Behnel wrote:
We had the discussion pop up a few times if implementing findall() through xpath() would be a good idea. It was generally agreed (and demonstrated in code) that this would too easily break ET compatibility, which was not considered worth it.
As far as I remember nobody just cared enough, and broken compatibility was only in cases where Frederik was testing incompleteness of his 'semi-xpath' implementation, for example testing that '//' is invalid expression, or there could not be '[..]' selectors after node name. In cases where the useful functionality was tested - there were no failures.