On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 23:45:55 -0400 Scott Dial <scott+python-...@scottdial.com> wrote: > On 8/26/2013 8:51 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > Le Mon, 26 Aug 2013 08:24:58 -0400, > > Tres Seaver <tsea...@palladion.com> a écrit : > >> On 08/26/2013 04:36 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > >>> event-driven processing using network libraries > >> > >> Maybe I missed something: why should considerations from that topic > >> influence the design of an API for XML processing? > > > > Because this API is mostly useful when the data is received (*) at a > > slow enough speed - which usually means from the network, not from a > > hard drive. > ... > > The whole *point* of adding IncrementalParser was to parse incoming > > XML data in a way that is friendly with event-driven network > > programming, other use cases being *already* covered by existing > > APIs. This is why it's far from nonsensical to re-use an existing > > terminology from that world. > > Since when is Tulip the OOWTDI? If this was Twisted, it would be "write" > and "finish"[1]. Tulip's Protocol ABC isn't even a good match for the > application. There is reason that Twisted has a separate > Consumer/Producer interface from the network I/O interface. > I'm sure > there is other existing practice in this specific area too (e.g., > XMLParser).
I'm really not convinced further bikeshedding on this issue has any point. If you have any concrete concerns, you can voice them on the issue tracker. Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ 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
