On Thu, 2007-23-08 at 10:45 -0600, Charlie Savage wrote: > Would the solution be a simple as having ruby nodes *never* freeing > libxml objects except the toplevel document (since it sounds like libxml > cleans up after itself).
Not all nodes wind up in documents, so unless you're prepared for possibly large memory leaks that is not going to work. > It seems like a fundamental decision has to be made - who is responsible > for freeing allocated nodes. Ruby? Libxml? Having both do it, which > sounds like the current situation, is obviously totally non-workable. The problem is that some nodes are allocated by libxml by parsing documents, processing xsl, etc, and some directly by ruby. I think the hybrid approach is necessary in order to get the speed benefits of using libxml, and I think a hybrid approach to freeing is therefore necessary. It does seem to demand a bit more smarts though, from the memory freeing mechanisms. __ Marc
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ libxml-devel mailing list libxml-devel@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/libxml-devel
