Eli Bendersky writes: > I'm strongly opposed to reverting [the change to ElementTree] > because it cleaned up messy code duplication and actually make the > code size smaller. While I agree that the API of incremental parsing > should be given another look, IncrementalParser can also be seen as > an implementation detail of iterparse().
Except that its API is familiar and cleaner. Does any current application depend on *not* doing whatever it is that the new API does that IncrementalParser *does* do? If not, why not keep the API of IncrementalParser and shim the new code in under that? > Thus, it's probably OK to revert the documentation part of the > commit to not mention IncrementalParser at all, FWIW, as somebody who can recall using ET exactly one, IncrementalParser is what I used. _______________________________________________ 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
