>>>>> "bill" == Bill Eldridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
bill> Kendall Clark wrote: >> At this point, this is wildly premature optimization talk, so >> I'll stop. :> (Er, not before mentioning that libxml2 has nice >> Python bindings now, and PyRXP is fast as bloody hell and has >> fairly decent memory usage; both require 3rd party C code, but >> such is life.) bill> PyRXP is only 14,000 lines of actual code, mostly broken into bill> small pieces of code except for xmlparser.c, and is GPL'ed, so bill> shouldn't be a big heartache. Compare that to 100,000 lines of bill> C code in libxml2 :( Sure, PyRXP is the bees knees. But... it's not as widely distributed as libxml2, which is pretty much on every Red Hat and GNOME box around. So there are pros and cons on both sides; libxml2 also does more than PyRXP, is just as fast, and when you throw in libxslt and it's Py bindings, Webware ought to think about using it anyway. But, ideally, DAV request parsing code should work with any SAX2 compliant parser. Best, Kendall Clark _______________________________________________ Webware-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-discuss
