On Mon, 6 May 2002, brad lafountain wrote: > > --- Christian Stocker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, 6 May 2002, brad lafountain wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > I have a patch for DomXML that does 2 things. It allows you to use new and > > > constructors to create dom elements. > > > > > > Ex. > > > > > > $doc = new DomDocument("some.file", true); > > > $ele = new DocElement("name"); > > > $doc->append_child($ele); > > > > as i said before, this is not according to the DOM-Standard, so i would > > rather prefer not to include this kind of behaviour, but i'd like to hear > > other opinions about that.... > > You are acually goign to argue that it isn't a dom-standard, so you don't want > it put in? There are a bunch of document non dom-standart functions. I don't > see how this is any different.
not really. but uwe made a lot of efforts to make it finally more dom compliant. But you're right, it doesn't hurt anyone, so i'm not really against it. > Does the dom-standard doesn't say that you need a separte xmldoc() and not a > new DomDocument, does it?. ranting is really not necessary here :) domxml was for a long time just a hack and didn't follow much of the standard, therefore there is still a lot of not-standard stuff in there and this stuff will (hopefully) not removed for BC's sake... > static zval *php_domobject_new(xmlNodePtr obj, int *found TSRMLS_DC); > to > PHPAPI zval *php_domobject_new(xmlNodePtr obj, int *found TSRMLS_DC); > > Then declaring > PHPAPI zval *php_domobject_new(xmlNodePtr obj, int *found TSRMLS_DC); > in php_domxml.h yep, no problem with that > > mmh. that's more or less to late now... > > Man... When is the next planned release? don't know. ask stig .) > What if just get in the PHPAPI export and try and convince you all about the > new Dom* later? RC2 was tagged today, so it's really to late (see dericks mail). You have to wait for 4.3 ... chregu -- PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php