On 12/13/05, Walter Dörwald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Guido van Rossum wrote: > > I don't think that SAX is unpythonic, but it's pretty low-level and > > mostly of use to people writing higher-level XML parsers (my parsexml > > module uses it). > > Having to define classes that conform to a certain API and registering > instances of those classes as callbacks with the parser doesn't look > that pythonic to me. An iterator API seems much more pythonic.
Perhaps. Although the SAX API lets you leave a callback undefined if you don't have a need to handle those events; that's a bit trickier to do with an iterator. Also the different callbacks have different signatures. But since /F solved this for ElementTree I have to mostly agree with you. :-) > Then again, pythonic is whatever you say that it is. ;) Not at all. I will argue but I will also take arguments from others. Seriously. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
