kalyanasundaram wrote: >>> So which would be better? XPath or linear traversing? >>> I dont know much about XPath implementation. (Do they not traverse >>> atleast once?) The file size is about 500 KB. :) >> That sounds rather small. Just parse it in and walk through it, that's what >> I'd do. >> > Really! I thought 500 Kb is bigger. How much it would be able to handle? > At what size I should go for XPath ?
The question is not "at what size". The question is: "what's the overhead involved in both cases in terms of speed and programming". If the XPath API is easy to use for you, go with it. But a custom tree walker can still be faster if you need it (and have the time to implement and optimise it). In lxml (the best Python bindings for libxml2/libxslt :), we use a pretty fast tree walker macro. See the end of http://codespeak.net/svn/lxml/trunk/src/lxml/etree_defs.h (BSD-licensed, BTW) Stefan _______________________________________________ xml mailing list, project page http://xmlsoft.org/ [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/xml
