[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


From: Richard Frith-Macdonald
Subject: Re: GSXML
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 12:52:59 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.9) Gecko/20020412 Debian/0.9.9-6

Nicola Pero wrote:

Reports of all such inconsistencies welcome ... the classes were originally written by someone unfamiliar with OpenStep, and while Nicola and I have put some effort
into making them more consistent, the job is not complete.

Since you quote me, I need to correct you - as I already said in public
posts, I think it's not just a problem of consistency or of details ...
the GSXML classes and their API are basically flawed and should be totally

I think that's a bit misleading taken out of the context of the earlier discussion.

The basic flaw in the GSXML classes is that they are based on libxml, and suffer the memory management problems of libxml. This basically manifests if you want to use them to create XML, not for parsing. The 'quick' fix is to change the GSXML API to better reflect the limitations of the underlying libxml model, and not to imply that elements may be freely created and moved around. This is what I'd like to see
done (opr might even do myself) in the short term.

The 'proper' fix is to rewrite from scratch, so that elements can be freely created, added
to documents, removed from documents, and moved around in documents.

The disadvantage of doing a proper fix is that it's time consuming ... the libxml implementation has two advantages when parsing ... speed, and validation against DTDs (the latter is quite tricky, and not matched by any other implementation I've seen).

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]