Re: [libxml-devel] Patches applied

2006-04-17 Thread Ross Bamford
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:43:37 +0100, TRANS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 4/17/06, Ross Bamford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 01:35:59 +0100, Sean Chittenden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >> >> On the other hand, I'm not necessarily adverse to having some kind >> >> of 'easy

Re: [libxml-devel] Patches applied

2006-04-17 Thread TRANS
On 4/17/06, Ross Bamford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 01:35:59 +0100, Sean Chittenden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > >> On the other hand, I'm not necessarily adverse to having some kind > >> of 'easy' API built on top of the core library, if there was enough > >> to it, and i

Re: [libxml-devel] Patches applied

2006-04-17 Thread Ross Bamford
On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 01:35:59 +0100, Sean Chittenden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On the other hand, I'm not necessarily adverse to having some kind >> of 'easy' API built on top of the core library, if there was enough >> to it, and it was sufficiently 'easy', but then again that's >> probably

Re: [libxml-devel] Patches applied

2006-04-16 Thread Sean Chittenden
> possible (including all the things we expect to have as rubyists, > like the above) then there won't be any unexpected gotchas that > could bite in code that would otherwise be nice and quick. > > On the other hand, I'm not necessarily adverse to having some kind > of 'easy' API built on top of

Re: [libxml-devel] Patches applied

2006-04-14 Thread Ross Bamford
On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 16:23:17 +0100, zdennis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I'll admit at this point that I've not deeply studied the additions Mark >> made in the ruby code, so I may well 180 on this 'not including ruby >> code' >> in the near future :-> > > The ruby stuff I am thinking of are ju

Re: [libxml-devel] Patches applied

2006-04-14 Thread zdennis
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ross Bamford wrote: > On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 13:24:41 +0100, zdennis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>A while back you posted: >> >> http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/libxml-devel/attachments/20051230/778cd254/libxml-x.obj >> >>And I know Mark VanHolst

Re: [libxml-devel] Patches applied

2006-04-14 Thread Ross Bamford
On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 13:24:41 +0100, zdennis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A while back you posted: > > http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/libxml-devel/attachments/20051230/778cd254/libxml-x.obj > > And I know Mark VanHolstyn posted some pure-ruby stuff with his patches > also. Will this ruby-add

Re: [libxml-devel] Patches applied

2006-04-14 Thread zdennis
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ross Bamford wrote: > On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 19:02:24 +0100, zdennis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>Do you like the idea of doing callbacks on specific node types? This >>should be possible with the SAXParser I would assume..but >>maybe I am wrong?

Re: [libxml-devel] Patches applied

2006-04-14 Thread Ross Bamford
On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 19:02:24 +0100, zdennis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Do you like the idea of doing callbacks on specific node types? This > should be possible with the SAXParser I would assume..but > maybe I am wrong? > Libxml2's SAX parser doesn't (AFAIK?) support this directly, and my f

Re: [libxml-devel] Patches applied

2006-04-12 Thread zdennis
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Do you like the idea of doing callbacks on specific node types? This should be possible with the SAXParser I would assume..but maybe I am wrong? Zach -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbir

Re: [libxml-devel] Patches applied

2006-04-12 Thread Ross Bamford
On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 17:47:19 +0100, zdennis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Ross Bamford wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I've today committed changesets including Mark Van Holstyn's patches, an >> additional patch I received from Tim Yamin, and a few small fixu

Re: [libxml-devel] Patches applied

2006-04-12 Thread zdennis
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ross Bamford wrote: > Hi, > > I've today committed changesets including Mark Van Holstyn's patches, an > additional patch I received from Tim Yamin, and a few small fixups and > extra tests. These fix bugs in XML::Node#content, and add several >

[libxml-devel] Patches applied

2006-04-12 Thread Ross Bamford
Hi, I've today committed changesets including Mark Van Holstyn's patches, an additional patch I received from Tim Yamin, and a few small fixups and extra tests. These fix bugs in XML::Node#content, and add several convenience methods to Node and Node::Set as previously discussed, as well a

Re: [libxml-devel] Patches

2006-04-06 Thread Ross Bamford
Hi Mark, On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 06:44:26 +0100, Mark Van Holstyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Attached are changes to two C files which include a few changes to the > XML::Node and XML::Node::Set, patches for both files, and a ruby file > implementing a couple of the same changes I made in the C f

Re: [libxml-devel] Patches

2006-04-04 Thread Mark Van Holstyn
And now the attatched file...Mark-- Mark Van Holstyn[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://lotswholetime.com libxml_patch.tgz Description: GNU Zip compressed data ___ libxml-devel mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/libxml-dev

[libxml-devel] Patches

2006-04-04 Thread Mark Van Holstyn
Attached are changes to two C files which include a few changes to the XML::Node and XML::Node::Set, patches for both files, and a ruby file implementing a couple of the same changes I made in the C files. The ruby file is the same as the one made by Ross found here: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/