On 9/6/07, Dan Janowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It is a good point, one that I considered. But it is not really an > error in the large sense. However, it may silently break code (by not > raising) which is definitely worse that explicitly breaking it. > > Unless there is an opinion to the contrary, I will replace the > warning with a raise, but only when using << or child= and not when > doing child_add.
Sounds like a good compromise. I think we tend to expect more explict behavior from operators, and conversely more flexability from other methods. T. _______________________________________________ libxml-devel mailing list libxml-devel@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/libxml-devel
