Hi Rob ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert J. Lebowitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > However, if the standard clone call is implemented, why add the > createCopy() > > method. Is there a preference of one over the other? > > Jim: > > I was working on an application last night that I believe is an example > where .createCopy() is more useful than .clone(). > > Aside from making a "deep copy" of the object it is "cloning", .createCopy() > also "detaches" the object from the rest of the object tree. I had a > situation where I wanted to remove all instances of <table> from an xhtml > document, and write them out to separate files. .createCopy() simplifies > this process. Without the detach(), I wouldn't be able to "add" the table > elements as the root element to a new document that I write out. > > I see it as a convenience method... nice of James to include it in the API.
Putting my pedantic hat on for a second... Though either clone() or createCopy() could be used for the same purpose - they both result in a deep copy which is detached from the original. createCopy() just avoids the cast & catch of CloneNotSupportedException. James _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ dom4j-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dom4j-user
