[reorganized a bit]
Ville Vainio [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why don't you use external validation on the created xml? Validating
it every time sounds like way too much like Javaic BD to be fun
anymore. Pickle should serve you well, and would probably remove about
half of your code. Do the
Ilpo Nyyssönen wrote:
What is the point in doing validation if it isn't done every time? Why
wouldn't I do it every time? It isn't that slow thing to do.
DTD validation is useful in two cases: making sure that data from
a foreign source has the right structure, and making sure that data
you
At least the interface looks quite simple and usable. With some
validation wrapping over it, it might be ok...
I was going to point you to a validating parser for ET, but the it might
be ok statement is a bit too arrogant for my taste.
I'll point you all to *two* validating parsers for ET
Ilpo == Ilpo Nyyssnen iny writes:
Ilpo Pickle doesn't have validation. I am not comfortable for
Ilpo using it as storage format that should be reliable over
Ilpo years when the program evolves. It also doesn't tell me if
That's why you should implement xml import/export mechanism
Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
so you picked the wrong file format for the task, and the slowest
tool you could find for that file format, and instead of fixing
that, you decided that the regular expression engine was to blame
for the bad performance. hmm.
What would you recommend
Ilpo == Ilpo Nyyssnen iny writes:
so you picked the wrong file format for the task, and the slowest
Ilpo What would you recommend instead?
Ilpo I have searched alternatives, but somehow I still find XML
Ilpo the best there is. It is a standard format with standard
Ilpo
Ilpo == Ilpo Nyyssnen iny writes:
Ilpo James Stroud [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is it relevant that Python can produce compiled expressions? I
don't think that there is such a thing with Perl.
Ilpo The problem in python here is that it needs to always
Ilpo recompile the
Ville Vainio [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ilpo == Ilpo Nyyssönen iny writes:
Ilpo The problem in python here is that it needs to always
Ilpo recompile the regexp. I would like to have a way to write a
Ilpo regexp as a constant and then python should compile that
Ilpo regexp to
Ilpo == Ilpo Nyyssnen iny writes:
Ilpo Of course it caches those when running. The point is that it
Ilpo needs to recompile every time you have restarted the
Ilpo program. With short lived command line programs this really
Ilpo can be a problem.
I didn't imagine it could be
On Thursday 21 April 2005 09:01 am, codecraig wrote:
I am interested in regular expressions and how Perl and Python
compare. Particulary, I am interested in performance (i.e. speed),
memory usage, flexibility, completeness (i.e. supports simple and
complex regex operations...basically is
Hi,
I am interested in regular expressions and how Perl and Python
compare. Particulary, I am interested in performance (i.e. speed),
memory usage, flexibility, completeness (i.e. supports simple and
complex regex operations...basically is RegEx a strong module/library
in Python?)
Anyone
Well so far from what I have found, Perl is faster than Python for
RegEx, although perl is harder to read.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
codecraig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well so far from what I have found, Perl is faster than Python for
RegEx, although perl is harder to read.
is this based on actual benchmarks, or just what people are saying on
the intarweb?
/F
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
I'd be very interested to see if there actually is a benchmark suite
for regexp's. I imagine that this could be an easy area for quite a
varied set of results, depending on the expression features included in
the actual regexp being tested, and even the nature of the input text.
For example, a
codecraig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
snip
Well so far from what I have found, Perl is faster than Python for
RegEx, although perl is harder to read.
Yawn
How about Python being easier to *write*?
It never ceases to amaze me. It takes days, weeks, months,
Paul McGuire wrote:
I'd be very interested to see if there actually is a benchmark suite
for regexp's. I imagine that this could be an easy area for quite a
varied set of results, depending on the expression features included in
the actual regexp being tested, and even the nature of the input
Thomas Bartkus wrote:
codecraig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
snip
Well so far from what I have found, Perl is faster than Python for
RegEx, although perl is harder to read.
Yawn
How about Python being easier to *write*?
It never ceases to amaze me. It takes days,
I found some benchmarking (perhaps simple) but search for The Great
Computer language shootout look at the original shootout and the
win32 one.
Thomas:
I doubt the total execution time for all the RegEx queries you ever
ran took
as much time as you just wasted on your little experiment.
codecraig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I found some benchmarking (perhaps simple) but search for The Great
Computer language shootout look at the original shootout and the
win32 one.
Thomas:
I doubt the total execution time for all the RegEx queries you ever
djw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
While I agree with (most of) your points, one should not overlook the
fact that there are cases when performance does matter (huge datasets
maybe?). Since the OP didn't indicate why performance was important to
him/her, one cannot
Is it relevant that Python can produce compiled expressions? I don't think
that there is such a thing with Perl.
Also, to all of the dozen or so people in the world less wise than me about
programming: don't choose your language on how fast the regex engine is. This
would then become a case of
codecraig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am interested in regular expressions and how Perl and Python
compare. Particulary, I am interested in performance (i.e. speed),
memory usage, flexibility, completeness (i.e. supports simple and
complex regex
Terry Reedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Depending upon you particular application, 'completeness' may be a
more relevant concern than 'performance'. I believe the original
Python regex engine did not have all the Perl extensions, some of them
decidedly 'non regular'. It was replace by the
Thanks for the input. I was just looking for some feedback about which
was better and faster, if an answer exists. However, I am not choosing
Perl or Python b/c of it's RegEx engine as someone mentioned. The
question was just because I was curious, sorry if I misled you to think
I was choosing
James Stroud [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is it relevant that Python can produce compiled expressions? I don't think
that there is such a thing with Perl.
The problem in python here is that it needs to always recompile the
regexp. I would like to have a way to write a regexp as a constant and
25 matches
Mail list logo
