Question 1

How does Lexbor compare to myhtml in real-world use?

Accepted Answer

Lexbor is positioned as a faster successor to myhtml, with benchmarks showing improved parse times (4.75s vs 5.98s) and lower memory usage. The API is nearly identical, easing migration, but Lexbor offers better CSS selector performance.

Question 2

Can Lexbor handle malformed or dirty HTML?

Accepted Answer

Yes, as an HTML5 parser, Lexbor is designed to handle real-world, imperfect HTML gracefully. However, specific error-handling behavior isn't detailed in the README, so testing with edge cases is recommended.

Question 3

How to install Lexbor on Windows or in a Docker container?

Accepted Answer

Installation requires Crystal and a C compiler. On Windows, use WSL or similar environments due to C dependency complexities. For Docker, include build steps for the lexbor C library as per the development setup.

Question 4

Is Lexbor thread-safe for concurrent parsing tasks?

Accepted Answer

The README doesn't specify thread safety. Since it wraps a C library, assume caution is needed; check the source code or issue tracker for concurrency notes, and consider isolating parser instances per thread.

Question 5

Lexbor vs Crystagiri: which should I choose for Crystal projects?

Accepted Answer

Choose Lexbor for speed and low memory, as it outperforms Crystagiri in benchmarks. Opt for Crystagiri if you need XPath support or are already using libxml2-based tools, but expect slower performance.

Question 6

Does Lexbor support modifying or serializing the DOM after parsing?

Accepted Answer

Yes, it allows DOM manipulation through its API, as seen in examples with node traversal and to_html methods. However, advanced modifications might require manual work compared to full-featured libraries.

lexbor

What is lexbor?

Overview

Use Cases

Best For

Found a gem we're missing?

Not Ideal For

Pros & Cons

Pros

Cons

Frequently Asked Questions