So far, very few of my proposed changes have made it as far as code. I was waiting for a little feedback before I went ahead and did anything. I will most likely start implementing some of the changed within the next week or so, and will submit anything I do to the libxml-ruby project. Hopefully any/all of these changes look promising.

Mark

On 3/22/06, zdennis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mark Van Holstyn wrote:
> Here is my suggestions for the API. Let me know what you think.
>

I think Mark's document makes alot of sense. I am using Marks changes currently (patched 0.3.6) and
I love the method 'first' that he has added to XML::Node.

I fully agree that removing Node::Set in favor or an Array would make the API more powerful.
Currently if I want to sort some nodes I have to put them in some other data structure. Ie:

   array = []
   node.find( 'Child1/Child2' ).each { |e| array << e }
   array.sort{ |a,b| a.meth <=> b.meth }

IMO, it is so much nicer to say:

   node.find( 'Child1/Child2' ).sort{ |a,b| a.meth <=> b.meth }

Replaing XML::Attr in place of array, is seems like that should be a hash, no? Maybe this was typo
on #5.

Mark, are all of these implemented in your patch (i haven't actually looked at the patch contents
itself)? If not let me know and I can help fulfill your api changes.

On a side note. Since I will be using libxml as well =) I can throw up a Trac site for libxml-ruby
if the team would like to use it. Currently we host for rubyeclipse as well
(http://rubyeclipse.mktec.com)

Zach
_______________________________________________
libxml-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/libxml-devel



--
Mark Van Holstyn
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lotswholetime.com
_______________________________________________
libxml-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/libxml-devel

Reply via email to