<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>Comments on article "About PyRXP"</title>
<link>http://base-art.net/Articles/27/</link>
<description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a class="reference" href="http://www.reportlab.org/pyrxp.html"&gt;PyRXP&lt;/a&gt; claims to be the fastest Python XML parser around... but this has a price. Once XML is parsed, you get a tree structured as tuples, lists and dictionnaries. While this is very Pythonic, it's not so trivial to write/read code handling such a tree.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;People at Reportlab argue about that for speed. Dealing with classes in Python is mem hungry, so they use only basic data structures (tuples,list,...). I can understand that but i believe it's an &lt;cite&gt;extremist&lt;/cite&gt; point. Finding a balance between the DOM API (which is &lt;cite&gt;extremist&lt;/cite&gt; too :) and such structures could turn to be more popular, maybe a Python &lt;cite&gt;xml_node&lt;/cite&gt; builtin type ...&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
<language>en</language>
<copyright>The contents of this blog are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Alinea http://pythonfr.org/alinea/</generator>


<item>
<title>Dj Mixer on About PyRXP</title>
<link>http://base-art.net/Comments/196/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://base-art.net/Comments/196/</guid>
<description><![CDATA[
&lt;p&gt;ReportLab are proud to present pyRXP version 0.9, the fastest validating XML parser available for Python, and quite possibly anywhere :-).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This is not a full DOM implementation, but we think it will do what 90% of the people want, in 10% of the time. And with validation. Enjoy!&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a class="reference" href="http://www.reportlab.co.uk/svn/public/reportlab/trunk/rl_addons/pyRXP/"&gt;http://www.reportlab.co.uk/svn/public/reportlab/trunk/rl_addons/pyRXP/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a class="reference" href="http://mp3djay.com"&gt;http://mp3djay.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

]]></description>
<dc:creator>Dj Mixer</dc:creator>
<dc:date>2006-03-12T19:56:07Z</dc:date>
</item>

<item>
<title>Fredrik on About PyRXP</title>
<link>http://base-art.net/Comments/77/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://base-art.net/Comments/77/</guid>
<description><![CDATA[
&lt;p&gt;According to my large-file benchmarks (large files, mostly ASCII, lot of elements, few attributes), Gnosis is nearly &lt;em&gt;10 times slower&lt;/em&gt; than RXPU, and uses twice as much memory.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;ElementTree 1.2.1 (and later) under Python 2.3 (or later) is as close as you can get with a pure-Python solution, and that's still over 4 times slower and needs 25% more memory.  The standard minidom is a little slower than that (but still faster than gnosis), but is extremely memory-hungry.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So don't trust the pundits: RXPU is &lt;em&gt;extremely&lt;/em&gt; fast, and very memory-efficient (and RXP is even faster, but more limited).&lt;/p&gt;

]]></description>
<dc:creator>Fredrik</dc:creator>
<dc:date>2004-12-26T09:31:40Z</dc:date>
</item>

<item>
<title>phil on About PyRXP</title>
<link>http://base-art.net/Comments/73/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://base-art.net/Comments/73/</guid>
<description><![CDATA[
&lt;p&gt;Ian,&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Yes the tuple-list-dictionnary representation is fine, i'm ok with that. But then, you have to mix lamba forms, map() calls to extract usefull informations from the tree. I don't use such coding tricks very often (maybe should i ?), so it's not easy.&lt;/p&gt;

]]></description>
<dc:creator>phil</dc:creator>
<dc:date>2004-12-23T10:42:23Z</dc:date>
</item>

<item>
<title>Ian Bicking on About PyRXP</title>
<link>http://base-art.net/Comments/72/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://base-art.net/Comments/72/</guid>
<description><![CDATA[
I can't speak to the Unicode issues (assuming that's the flaw people are talking about with PyRXP).  But I used RXP a while ago, and it seemed fine to me.  Honestly, I don't find the tuple-and-list representation to be a problem at all.  Certainly a representation using an efficient type would be preferable, but as long as you aren't actually exposing the tuples outside of your domain library, they seem like a reasonable compromise.  Maybe with __slots__ (which postdate PyRXP?) the memory efficiency isn't as much of an issue -- though object construction time would still be a concern (assuming that tuples and lists are very fast to create).
]]></description>
<dc:creator>Ian Bicking</dc:creator>
<dc:date>2004-12-23T08:23:54Z</dc:date>
</item>

<item>
<title>phil on About PyRXP</title>
<link>http://base-art.net/Comments/71/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://base-art.net/Comments/71/</guid>
<description><![CDATA[
Ok, so i forget PyRXP forever ... i'm impatient to see PyRXPU compared to others (real?) parsers. The PyRXP's homepage is wrong so ...
]]></description>
<dc:creator>phil</dc:creator>
<dc:date>2004-12-21T18:35:43Z</dc:date>
</item>

<item>
<title>verbat on About PyRXP</title>
<link>http://base-art.net/Comments/70/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://base-art.net/Comments/70/</guid>
<description><![CDATA[
stop using PyRXP now. It's not an xml parser, and it should eb replaced by PyRXPU ASAP. Then, it would be slow, obviously.
]]></description>
<dc:creator>verbat</dc:creator>
<dc:date>2004-12-20T17:33:35Z</dc:date>
</item>

<item>
<title>anon on About PyRXP</title>
<link>http://base-art.net/Comments/69/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://base-art.net/Comments/69/</guid>
<description><![CDATA[
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a class="reference" href="http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/x-matters39.html"&gt;http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/x-matters39.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I'm pretty sure gnosis.xml.objectify is quite close in speed to pyRXP--especially if you compare to the Unicode-enabled pyRXPU that actually parses XML (rather than some XML-like non-standard language: see Uche Ogbuji's comments on this).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;At the same time: gnosis.xml.objectify nodes are as Pythonic as you can possibly get.  Even more so, IMO, than those in ElementTree, for example.&lt;/p&gt;

]]></description>
<dc:creator>anon</dc:creator>
<dc:date>2004-12-19T18:01:43Z</dc:date>
</item>


</channel>
</rss>