Hi,
thanks for checking in.
As far as I know, there is no solution for this problem yet.
Daniel recommended to debug into xmllib to find out what the problem might
be - I simply don't have the bandwidth to do that.
So, I opted for avoiding the problem as a whole by downgrading to 2.8.0.
I guess
Hi,
not a lot of help I know, but this is all I have to offer right noww.
I think, Ubuntu does upgrades pretty well. I have upgraded from 9.x to 12.x
each release (have not tried 13.x yet) and I had only one minor problem
(with grub), so I'd like to think you can rule out the upgrade issue. But,
Howdy,
The existing C++ bindings for libxml, the libxmlplusplus library, seem to
support, basically, just parsing an existing XML document.
I've been working on C++11 bindings that provide a more complete, thread-safe
tree, parser, entities, xmlsave, and xpath API coverage:
#include libxml/parser.h
#include libxml/tree.h
#include stdio.h
int
main (int argc, char** argv)
{
xmlDocPtr doc = xmlReadMemory(doc/, 6, egg.xml, NULL, 0);
/* XmlNode *//* XmlDoc */
printf(%s\n, (doc-children-parent == doc) ? true : false);
return 0;
}
On 4/29/2013 07:30, Nikita Churaev wrote:
#include libxml/parser.h
#include libxml/tree.h
#include stdio.h
int
main (int argc, char** argv)
{
xmlDocPtr doc = xmlReadMemory(doc/, 6, egg.xml, NULL, 0);
/* XmlNode *//* XmlDoc */
printf(%s\n,
No it's not.
http://xmlsoft.org/html/libxml-tree.html#xmlDoc
http://xmlsoft.org/html/libxml-tree.html#xmlNode
xmlDoc has int compression instead of xmlNode's xmlNs
On Mon, 2013-04-29 at 07:48 +0400, Nikolay Sivov wrote:
On 4/29/2013 07:30, Nikita Churaev wrote:
#include libxml/parser.h
On 4/29/2013 07:59, Nikita Churaev wrote:
No it's not.
http://xmlsoft.org/html/libxml-tree.html#xmlDoc
http://xmlsoft.org/html/libxml-tree.html#xmlNode
xmlDoc has int compression instead of xmlNode's xmlNs
I see what you mean. All node types are using same layout containing basic
stuff to
Is this allowed by the C standard? And where is this documented?
On Mon, 2013-04-29 at 08:14 +0400, Nikolay Sivov wrote:
On 4/29/2013 07:59, Nikita Churaev wrote:
No it's not.
http://xmlsoft.org/html/libxml-tree.html#xmlDoc
http://xmlsoft.org/html/libxml-tree.html#xmlNode
xmlDoc
On 4/29/2013 08:18, Nikita Churaev wrote:
Is this allowed by the C standard? And where is this documented?
It doesn't have anything to do with C standard. Not sure if it's
documented anywhere,
you have headers with all that info, personally I just read lib code if
in doubt.
On Mon,
It doesn't have anything to do with C standard.
It does. Take for example:
struct A {
int q;
int w;
/* end of common part */
float x;
};
struct B {
int q;
int w;
/* end of common part */
double x;
};
What if the C standard allows the compiler to place q and w further
apart
On Mon, 2013-04-29 at 08:32 +0400, Nikita Churaev wrote:
It doesn't have anything to do with C standard.
It does. Take for example:
struct A {
int q;
int w;
/* end of common part */
float x;
};
struct B {
int q;
int w;
/* end of common part */
double x;
};
On 29Apr13 08:32, Nikita Churaev wrote:
} It doesn't have anything to do with C standard.
}
}What if the C standard allows the compiler to place q and w further
}apart in struct A than in struct B? Then if you cast struct A *a into
}struct B *b, you'll get garbage in b-w.
See KR II (ie. the ANSI
12 matches
Mail list logo
