Hi Joe, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 12/10/2007 01:08:09 PM:
> > Tying this back to my question, I take Joseph as saying that he > doesn't believe the Xerces DOM should ever > be made thread-safe for read > > I'm saying I don't believe semaphores should be added to the > standard to the standard Xerces DOM. Users can plug in an > appropriate DOM implementation if they need threadsafety at the DOM level. > > Apropos of which: I believe the non-incremental Xerces DOM *is* > already essentially "thread-safe for read", though the demand- > constructed version isn't. If that's all you need, Xerces may > already have solved your problem...? None of Xerces DOM implementations are thread-safe for read. I can think of at least a couple of places in the non-incremental Xerces DOM which aren't thread-safe, the getChildNodes() NodeLists being one of them. > ______________________________________ > "... Three things see no end: A loop with exit code done wrong, > A semaphore untested, And the change that comes along. ..." > -- "Threes" Rev 1.1 - Duane Elms / Leslie Fish (http://www.ovff. > org/pegasus/songs/threes-rev-11.html) Thanks. Michael Glavassevich XML Parser Development IBM Toronto Lab E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
