Quote:
Originally Posted by chaley
When I first implemented GPM I compiled the templates into python. That didn't work out when the formatter started being used in threads so I took it out. That could be the source of the thought that GPM is slower.
|
That's probably it.
Quote:
|
GPM will be slower for trivial templates such as "{authors}". It should be faster for things like "{authors:sublist(1,2,&)}". It will be faster for TPM templates like "{authors:'sublist($,1,2,'&')'}" because the quoted part is treated as a GPM template.
|
And that is good to know as I have done the latter a few times in answering questions here.
Quote:
|
Template functions are the fastest option, assuming that they do something more than return a metadata field. They are compiled into python executable code so the only overhead is looking up the function and passing the arguments.
|
Even better. There is something about the template language that my brain doesn't like. Using Python for some things just seems easier.
Quote:
|
Of course, the right way to answer the question is to time equivalent templates/programs, but I am too lazy.
|
Me to. And, I know that if I started doing it, I'd suddenly realise that a couple of days had gone past without actually achieving anything useful.