[XML-SIG] SAX 2.0 names
Tue, 29 Feb 2000 21:10:42 -0500
Fred L. Drake, Jr. wrote-
> THOMAS PASSIN writes:
> > In earlier posts I suggested tuples. Fred and Lars' posts seem to be
> > that tuples shouldn't cause a bug performance hit, and that could
> > be finessed anyway. Have I summarized what you have said correctly,
> > and Lars?
> That's my interpretation.
> > Then I think we should go with tuples, because
> > 1) They are easy for a non-expert Python programmer to understand and
> > with,
> > 2) they capitalize on a Python strength (nice data structures),
> > 3) an expert can make them perform even better with extension modules,
> > 4) as Fred said, if the extension module were not available one could
> > back to a 100% Python implementation with practically no changes to
> > code.
> The "object" I imagine has three attributes: namespace URI,
> localpart, and prefix. It would unpack to two values: URI &
> localpart, and comparisons would only operate on those two as well.
This sounds much like my original proposal for a nested tuple. Perhaps
((localname,uri),prefix). Lars pointed out that the java SAX2 people seem
to want the raw name - I'm not convinced since you need the namespace to
confirm what the localname is supposed to mean, not the rawname.
Comparisons are very easy. Will a nested tuple drag down performance a lot
more than a plain tuple? Again, I think that say, a one or two percent
decrease in real-life usage is nothing to worry about.
> The advantage is that we get the prefix for those who want it,
> single object comparisons, and no extraneous parameters to the call.
> I don't think *this* is available using the non-object approaches.
> Whether the objects are extension types or classes is irrelevant to