[Twisted-Python] domish.Element.__getattr__() or xpath.XPathQuery
Hello everyone,
I was wondering what you would recommend, accessing nodes via domish.Element.__getattr__() (e.g. el.node1.node1_1, where el is /msg) or via xpath.XPathQuery() (e.g. xpath.XPathQuery("/msg/node1/node1_1").queryForNodes(el)[0])?
I was wondering which would be faster, the __getattr__() is O(n) (in my example there are 2 calls) but what about xpath.XPathQuery()?
Thank you, Gabriel
On 4 Feb, 10:48 am, gabriel.rossetti@arimaz.com wrote:
Hello everyone,
I was wondering what you would recommend, accessing nodes via domish.Element.__getattr__() (e.g. el.node1.node1_1, where el is /msg) or via xpath.XPathQuery() (e.g. xpath.XPathQuery("/msg/node1/node1_1").queryForNodes(el)[0])?
I was wondering which would be faster, the __getattr__() is O(n) (in my example there are 2 calls) but what about xpath.XPathQuery()?
I don't think you'll find the xpath API to be much more optimized. I haven't used XMPP much, but considering the xpath implementation is incomplete (and afaik there's little documentation about what subset is supported), I'd stick with the simpler (if still terrible) Element.__getattr__.
Jean-Paul
exarkun@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
On 4 Feb, 10:48 am, gabriel.rossetti@arimaz.com wrote:
Hello everyone,
I was wondering what you would recommend, accessing nodes via domish.Element.__getattr__() (e.g. el.node1.node1_1, where el is /msg) or via xpath.XPathQuery() (e.g. xpath.XPathQuery("/msg/node1/node1_1").queryForNodes(el)[0])?
I was wondering which would be faster, the __getattr__() is O(n) (in my example there are 2 calls) but what about xpath.XPathQuery()?
I don't think you'll find the xpath API to be much more optimized. I haven't used XMPP much, but considering the xpath implementation is incomplete (and afaik there's little documentation about what subset is supported), I'd stick with the simpler (if still terrible) Element.__getattr__.
Jean-Paul
Ok, thank you. Just a question, would it be interesting to anyone to be able to choose in between the internal XPATH implementation and an external lib/implementation for the XMPP stuff? I have often wondered if it would not be better to allow the user to choose.
Gabriel
On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 08:26:43AM +0100, Gabriel Rossetti wrote:
Ok, thank you. Just a question, would it be interesting to anyone to be able to choose in between the internal XPATH implementation and an external lib/implementation for the XMPP stuff? I have often wondered if it would not be better to allow the user to choose.
I seem to recall that the last time people discussed reusing a generic XML library rather than a custom one, it was discovered that XMPP isn't quite actually XML - it has a bunch of crazy restrictions that basically mean you need an XMPP-specific library. If there's a third-part XMPP library that could be plugged in, that would be a very interesting thing to know.
On 11:03 am, screwtape@froup.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 08:26:43AM +0100, Gabriel Rossetti wrote:
Ok, thank you. Just a question, would it be interesting to anyone to be able to choose in between the internal XPATH implementation and an external lib/implementation for the XMPP stuff? I have often wondered if it would not be better to allow the user to choose.
I seem to recall that the last time people discussed reusing a generic XML library rather than a custom one, it was discovered that XMPP isn't quite actually XML - it has a bunch of crazy restrictions that basically mean you need an XMPP-specific library. If there's a third-part XMPP library that could be plugged in, that would be a very interesting thing to know.
The discussion is mostly summarized here:
http://twistedmatrix.com/trac/ticket/3201
I hope that eventually someone will find a good XML library which has the the features described there, and then we can switch to it.
Jean-Paul
participants (3)
-
exarkun＠twistedmatrix.com -
Gabriel Rossetti -
Tim Allen