Thanks for the feedback Samar. Guess I'll take it case by case.
jalal On Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:10:14 -0800 Samar Lotia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > IMHO, in the best scenario, you should pass in the buffer yourself. This > way > you can optimzie whether the buffer is allocated on the stack or the > heap. > Also, you can control how you release the memory for the buffer, i.e. > what > particular allocator you are using etc. > > On the other hand, the method where Xerces allocates the memory is the > easiest, i.e. you don't have to make sure your buffer is big enough, etc. > > Take your pick. I prefer to use the first method, because we have issues > with mixed allocators in our product, and it also allows me to optimize > heap > access. > > If your application is not sensitive to heap access (i.e. this could be > an > issue in certain heavily multithreaded server applications) and you do > not > have issues with different allocators being used then the second method > is > probably best, as it is the most convenient and allows you to let Xerces > determine buffer size etc. > > Samar _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
