Stefan Behnel added the comment: I considered lxml.etree support more of a convenience feature, just for comparison. Given that it's a binary package that doesn't run reliably on other Python implementations apart of CPython, I don't think it's really interesting to make it part of the benchmark suite. I'd rather add an explicit option to enable it than include it there.
I'm ok with the conditional import for ET, although I don't see a reason to exclude it. Why not be able to compare the performance of both implementations as well? There's a slowpickle benchmark, for example. So, what about only testing cET by default and adding an explicit option "--etree-module=package.module" to change the imported module, e.g. "--etree-module=lxml.etree" to benchmark lxml or "--etree-module=cElementTree" to benchmark a separately installed 3rd party cET package? ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue17573> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
