Movatterモバイル変換
[0]ホーム
[Python-Dev] folding cElementTree behind ElementTree in 3.3
Antoine Pitrousolipsis at pitrou.net
Tue Feb 21 23:06:22 CET 2012
On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 12:41:17 +0200Eli Bendersky <eliben at gmail.com> wrote:> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 03:59, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:>> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Eli Bendersky <eliben at gmail.com> wrote:> > > So the two choices here are either change the documentation or the C> > > implementation to actually make Element a class. The first is of course> > > simpler. However, someone somewhere may have written code that knowingly> > > forces the Python implementation to be used and subclasses Element. Such> > > code will break in 3.3, so it probably makes sense to invest in making> > > Element a class in the C implementation as well.> >> > Yeah, that's my take as well (especially since, in 3.2 and earlier,> > "forcing" use of the pure Python version was just a matter of> > importing ElementTree instead of cElementTree).> >> >> I can't fathom why someone would do it though, since bar tiny differences> (like this one) cET is just a faster ET and it's available practically> everywhere with CPython. I mean, is it really important to be able to> subclass ET.Element? What goal does it serve?It probably wouldn't be very difficult to make element_new() the tp_newof Element_Type, and expose that type as "Element".That would settle the issue nicely and avoid compatibility concerns :)RegardsAntoine.
More information about the Python-Devmailing list
[8]ページ先頭