Martin von Loewis wrote: > > > If you want a very fast validating XML parser, RXP would also > > be a good choice -- AFAIK, the RXP folks would allow us to > > ship RXP under a different license than GPL which is then > > bound to Python. > > RXP would indeed be a choice. Of course, integrating it is much > harder; you'd have to write the C module first, plus documentation, > plus a SAX driver, plus test cases. I'm not sure how much code you can > inherit from PyLTXML. > > On performance: Please have a look at > > http://www.xml.com/lpt/a/Benchmark/exec.html > > which suggests that expat still has a speed advantage over rxp > (assuming that the measurements where done carefully, i.e. disabling > validation in RXP). How would libxml fit into this picture ? http://xmlsoft.org/ libxml is written in C as well and under the LGPL. There's also Apache's Xerces which is written in a portable subset of C++ (is probably to big though to be intergated into Python): http://xml.apache.org/xerces-c/ -- Marc-Andre Lemburg CEO eGenix.com Software GmbH ______________________________________________________________________ Consulting & Company: http://www.egenix.com/ Python Software: http://www.lemburg.com/python/
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4