Hi Brian,
Yes, for small documents it's not a problem, but for large markup-heavy
documents, it's adds up really fast. If you can layer it, that would be
great. We could also make that something controlled by a #define, so if
that would help you, it's OK with me.
Dave
Brian Quinlan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
com> cc: (bcc: David N
Bertoni/Cambridge/IBM)
Subject: RE: Should all of the
unimplemented DOM functions throw exceptions?
02/25/2003 12:39
PM
Please respond
to xalan-dev
> We already have a lazy implementation for that,
Ah, I see what XalanNodeListSurrogate does now.
> but I worry about bloating
> the size of elements if we decide to add it, since it means 4 or 8
extra
> bytes per Element for an interface we don't use internally.
Added 10% to the size doesn't seem important to me but I don't work with
huge source documents.
> Is it something you can layer on top of our implementation, or is that
> too awkward?
I can layer it on top of Xalan. It's a bit of a hassle but not a huge
one.
Cheers,
Brian
RE: Should all of the unimplemented DOM functions throw exceptions?
David N Bertoni/Cambridge/IBM Tue, 25 Feb 2003 12:56:20 -0800
- Summary of XalanJ work (long!) ilene
- Re: Summary of XalanJ work (long!) zongaro
- Should all of the unimplemented DOM... Brian Quinlan
- Re: Should all of the unimpleme... David N Bertoni/Cambridge/IBM
- Re: Should all of the unimpleme... Joseph Kesselman
- RE: Should all of the unimp... Brian Quinlan
- RE: Should all of the ... David N Bertoni/Cambridge/IBM
- RE: Should all of ... Brian Quinlan
- Re: Summary of... David N Bertoni/Cambridge/IBM
- Re: Summary of XalanJ work (long!) Santiago Pericas-Geertsen
