[issue2170] rewrite of minidom.Node.normalize

[R. David Murray]

R. David Murray <rdmurray at bitdance.com> added the comment:

I checked the speed of the proposed patch, and found that it was
definitely slower than the original code.  So I took another look at the
original, and refactored it in a different way: instead of moving the
sibling relinking into a second pass, I changed to code to only relink
siblings when a node is removed.  The new patch passes all test, and is
faster than the old code.  I tested the timing both against the same
small nested document I used in testNormalize2, and by running normalize
on a 37K html document (a copy of the xml.dom.minidom chapter from the
Library Reference):

original code:
testNormalize2: [2.5144219398498535, 2.5053589344024658, 2.5059471130371094]
example.html:   [44.641155958175659, 44.575434923171997, 44.996657133102417]

original patch
testNormalize2: [2.7070891857147217, 2.7012341022491455, 2.7003159523010254]
example.html:   [67.908604860305786, 68.088788986206055, 67.92288613319397]

My patch
testNormalize2: [2.4626028537750244, 2.4619381427764893, 2.4617609977722168]
example.html:   [22.780415058135986, 22.780103921890259, 22.721666097640991]

IMO my refactoring is also easier to understand than either the old code
or the proposed patch.

Patch, including new test, is attached, and also pushed to
bzr+ssh://bazaar.launchpad.net/~rdmurray/python/issue2170.

----------
versions: +Python 2.7, Python 3.0, Python 3.1
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file13349/issue2170.patch

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue2170>
_______________________________________