On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 4:49 AM, Alan Gauld <alan.ga...@btinternet.com> wrote: > > "David Hutto" <smokefl...@gmail.com> wrote > >> > Note that it's not unlikely that this is actually *slower* than > using >> > a real >> > XML parser: >> >> Or a 'real' language like C or C++ maybe to increase, or in Python's >> case, bypass, the interpreter? > > Most of the Python xml parsers are written in C - many use the > industry standard expat parser - so converting to C would bring > minimal speed advantage and a lot of extra work.
Somewhat of the fact that python uses C encourages me of that, but I have still been looking into c++ to optimize, because I've used it before, and the more languages I learn the more they feel 'similar', but the same, if you can understand that! _______________________________________________ Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
