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
