In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Dan Janowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What I need now is a few concise examples that have blown up
> previously. I am particularly looking for ones that just use the node
> operations.
Attached is roughly the test case I was using when I was working
Tom,
This is now memory stable. The script completes using only 15MB.
On Aug 29, 2007, at 04:01, Tom Hughes wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Dan Janowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> What I need now is a few concise examples that have blown up
>> previously. I am particularly
Hi all,
I have just committed the current state of my memory overhaul to a
branch MEM2. It is not complete, but it includes rewritten node,
document and attr. I also removed attribute. It does pass the tests
run during rake, so it may be good to try out generally, but I make
no guarantees.
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Dan Janowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is now memory stable. The script completes using only 15MB.
Excellent.
Incidentally, now people are actively working on the wrapper again
you might want to look at my other patch which is a simple one that
fi
Dan,
Just tried to build, per your instructions. For me it fails some of the
self tests:
---
. . .
Loaded suite /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/rake/rake_test_loader
Started
...F.F..
EXPECTING: TWO ER
Dan,
If you have a second, could you fix the free/xfee issue (or I can do it
once you are done, I just don't want to interfere with what you are
doing).
The problem is that various structures in libxml are allocated with the
macro ALLOC, which means the ruby executable is creating the memory
Hi--
Haven't heard from Ross on the matter, I guess he's busy. So I'm just
going to go ahead and move the libxslt binding code over to the libxsl
project (actually an up-to-date copy is already there). If we later
confirm that it is a good idea to merge the two libs we can do so in
the future. In
Charlie,
If they are the ones I am thinking of, they are going away entirely
(no longer needed). If they were in ruby_xml_{node,document,attr}.c,
there are gone now. They will be in modules I have not touched yet,
but they will go too.
There is no code carried forward for ruby_xml_*_new or
If they are the ones I am thinking of, they are going away entirely
(no longer needed). If they were in ruby_xml_{node,document,attr}.c,
there are gone now. They will be in modules I have not touched yet,
but they will go too.
Excellent - that's even better then.
There is no code carried f
