On 7 Aug 2001, Ian Holsman wrote: > > The above is also symptomatic of numerous problems throughout the > > patch in terms of spacing and stylistic problems. Cliff: please > > either reject the patch until Ian can fix them, or take the time > > yourself before checking in. > > that was done.
Yeah, I cleaned it up. There are some things in testxml I'm still wary of (what on earth is perror()?), but it's a test program, not compiled by default or even really distributed, so I guess it doesn't much matter. It seems to work on Linux. It could still use some cleaning up; there seems to be a lot of duplicated code, for example--but that can happen on a second pass. > > The buffer length should be an apr_size_t. > > > > The parser should not be returned. There is no need: it is entirely an > > internal concept. Note that it is created, then marked as "done". The caller > > can't do anything with it at that point. > > > > Is the point to return an error message or something? > > the only way a caller can get the XML error messages is by referencing > the 'parser' the variable is only set if there is a error. > > I don't know of any other way (except for passing a error-buffer into > the call) of getting the XML specific messages out. I'll let you guys figure out the best way to handle this, and it can be patched later. Thanks, Cliff -------------------------------------------------------------- Cliff Woolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Charlottesville, VA
