Lenny,

I haven't looked into your changes yet.  But it is in my TODO list, and will do
that within the next few weeks.  I will let you know my comment, if any, by
that time.  Thanks!

Tinny

Lenny Hoffman wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I don't know if anyone has had a chance to look at my proposed refactoring
> (Bugzilla 5967) yet, but I attached to it a few more changes.
>
> I changed DOM_DOMImplementation from being a singleton wrapping a singleton
> (IDDOMImplementation), to being a smart pointer wrapping any provided
> IDOM_DOMImplementation.  If none is provided then the default is to use
> IDDOMImplementation.  Now DOM_DOMImplementation follows the pattern set by
> all the other DOM_* wrappers of IDOM_* classes.  Along with adding
> consistency, this change ended up being necessary to support pluggable
> back-ends.  I had been thinking that developers of alternative back-ends
> would create their own DOM_DOMImplementation replacement, but that does not
> work for DOM_Document, which needs to know how to construct a specific
> DOM_DOMImplementation in its getImplementation method.  With this change I
> was able to change DOM_Document::getImplementation to construct the generic
> DOM_DOMImplementation wrapper around the IDOM_DomImplemenation discoverable
> from its wrapped IDOM_Document.
>
> I added a new method -- IDOM_Node *getNodeImplementation() const -- to
> DOM_Node to allow access to specialized IDOM_Node implementations via
> DOM_Nodes.
>
> Lenny
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to