Arnaud Le Hors wrote: > additional object to pass data around. We already have Attributes and > Augmentations that do just that.
Yes, but those are passed explicitly in the method calls. So it's a little different. > On the other hand, passing this object through a property does seem to > be inconsistent with what we currently do. So, how about some middle > ground where we'd have a new object NamespaceContext that is passed in > parameter to StartElement? Interesting idea but that would break our user base again. And we're doing all of this for a 6% gain on files larger than 32K? Seems a bit much. I'm sure we could find 6% somewhere in the impl without changing XNI. > implementing the framework. I don't see how this proposal changes > anything on that front (apart from the reliance on a property which I > propose to avoid). Me, too. I'm glad we agree on this point. :) -- Andy Clark * [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
