Thanks for the comments John.  I am fine with moving this functionality
out of the core code, but I am debating where it should go....should I
create a completely new feature or maybe we could add it to the xmlutil
feature.  Paul had mentioned that the xmlutil feature is used for
templating code.  I just didn't want to create a whole new feature just
for one simple function, unless everyone agrees thats the best thing to
do.  Thoughts?

On 2011/04/26 01:14:49, johnfargo wrote:
thoughts welcome.


http://codereview.appspot.com/4438071/diff/1/features/src/main/javascript/features/core.json/feature.xml
File features/src/main/javascript/features/core.json/feature.xml
(right):


http://codereview.appspot.com/4438071/diff/1/features/src/main/javascript/features/core.json/feature.xml#newcode33
features/src/main/javascript/features/core.json/feature.xml:33:
<exports
type="js">gadgets.json.convertXmlToJson</exports>
since there are no deps between this file and the rest of
gadgets.json, let's
split this off into a subfeature. Suggestion: gadgets.json.xml. Doing
so will
avoid putting additional size burden on those who want only to load
the "core"
JSON methods themselves.


http://codereview.appspot.com/4438071/diff/1/features/src/main/javascript/features/core.json/json-xmltojson.js
File features/src/main/javascript/features/core.json/json-xmltojson.js
(right):


http://codereview.appspot.com/4438071/diff/1/features/src/main/javascript/features/core.json/json-xmltojson.js#newcode32
features/src/main/javascript/features/core.json/json-xmltojson.js:32:
//Integer
which represents a text node
I'm getting some spacing issues here -- tabs perhaps rather than
2-space indent?



http://codereview.appspot.com/4438071/

Reply via email to