Malthe, Stephan I decided after along night, trying to compile lxml on a windows box, that we will not use lxml and lxml based packages like z3c.form, z3c.template, z3c.macro etc at some of our windows servers. We have to find a strategy to keep this packages free of lxml and implement the z3c.pt support in this packages in a different way. I really like your lxml based z3c.pt work. It's nice and incredible fast. What do you think about that? I know it's a hugh amount of work, but I'm willing to help with the refactoring if you like. Regards Roger Ineichen _____________________________ END OF MESSAGE
2008/9/15 Roger Ineichen <dev@projekt01.ch>:
I know it's a hugh amount of work, but I'm willing to help with the refactoring if you like.
Actually it should be relatively straight-forward to lose the lxml dependency; currently there are two things in the way: 1) There's an issue with CDATA clauses and ElementTree 2) We have no XPath support, so the few queries we use during compilation will have to be replaced by functions that walk the tree. \malthe
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Roger Ineichen wrote:
I decided after along night, trying to compile lxml on a windows box, that we will not use lxml and lxml based packages like z3c.form, z3c.template, z3c.macro etc at some of our windows servers.
Roger, I don't understand why you feel this way: there are perfectly usable binary eggs available for Windows, aren't there? I know that no Windows binaries are available yet for lxml 2.1.2, which has been out for all of 10 days, but they are available for 2.1.1.
We have to find a strategy to keep this packages free of lxml and implement the z3c.pt support in this packages in a different way.
- -1. There is not much point in z3c.pt at all without lxml, which is where the speed boost comes from.
I really like your lxml based z3c.pt work. It's nice and incredible fast.
It won't be fast if we rip out the lxml.
What do you think about that?
I know it's a hugh amount of work, but I'm willing to help with the refactoring if you like.
Tres. - -- =================================================================== Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tseaver@palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFIzyPL+gerLs4ltQ4RAr+3AJ4jh/8JPVazel2q9Hpz4ab60olqPgCgsK1B WlNc8FAiGHG/CUAa/pShLUI= =DoFh -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Tres Seaver wrote:
We have to find a strategy to keep this packages free of lxml and implement the z3c.pt support in this packages in a different way.
-1. There is not much point in z3c.pt at all without lxml, which is where the speed boost comes from.
Actually, lxml is only used at compile time. z3c.pt compilation is already much slower than zope.pagetemplate compilation, but it's not really noticeable in the big scheme of things, as compilation happens at most once per process invocation. The speed of z3c.pt mostly comes from compiling down to Python code that is executed at template call time. At template call time, lxml is not used at all. - C
What's the actual issue with lxml? It's not that hard to compile it (I'm the person that compiles the official releases), just a little bit under-documented. On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 12:29 AM, Roger Ineichen <dev@projekt01.ch> wrote:
Malthe, Stephan
I decided after along night, trying to compile lxml on a windows box, that we will not use lxml and lxml based packages like z3c.form, z3c.template, z3c.macro etc at some of our windows servers.
We have to find a strategy to keep this packages free of lxml and implement the z3c.pt support in this packages in a different way.
I really like your lxml based z3c.pt work. It's nice and incredible fast.
What do you think about that?
I know it's a hugh amount of work, but I'm willing to help with the refactoring if you like.
Regards Roger Ineichen _____________________________ END OF MESSAGE
_______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
-- Sidnei da Silva Enfold Systems http://enfoldsystems.com Fax +1 832 201 8856 Office +1 713 942 2377 Ext 214
Hi Sidnei
Betreff: Re: [Zope-dev] lxml and z3c.form strategy?
What's the actual issue with lxml? It's not that hard to compile it (I'm the person that compiles the official releases), just a little bit under-documented.
We started to use lxml in different z3c.* packages. The problem right now is that we need to ensure a stable release concept for lxml on windows. Are you doing future release for lxml? btw, are you using the Visual Studio or mingw compiler? Regards Roger Ineichen
participants (5)
-
Chris McDonough -
Malthe Borch -
Roger Ineichen -
Sidnei da Silva -
Tres Seaver