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.
Strongly agree. This very morning I wrote a long tirade about how I wish Python had true coroutines, for the sole reason that I could wrap SAX in an iterator-based API. Eventually I decided it was SAX's fault for having such a crummy API, so I didn't post it. -j _______________________________________________ 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
