On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 09:14:42AM -0500, Rob Richards wrote:
> While going through the ID stuff found that the same code needed to be
> added in many spots as code is duplicated all over the place.
> Is there any reason it is done this way or just never cleaned up?
probably it was just never cleaned up !
> Here's a patch around some of the Prop functions.
>
> Added an internal xmlNewPropInternal function which xmlNewProp,
> xmlNewNsProp and xmlNewNsPropEatName use. This will make sure these
> functions work the same as xmlNewNsProp and xmlNewNsPropEatName never
> checked the node type to insure it was an element.
ouch, yes
> Didn't add xmlNewDocProp but could easily be done with another paramter
> as well as not sure if this is a bug, but xmlNewDocProp doesnt call
> xmlEncodeEntitiesReentrant as the other ones do.
>
> Also used xmlUnLinkNode within xmlUnsetProp and xmlUnsetNsProp. This
> will allow for any uncessary ID calls to be made properly otherwise
> would need to duplicate that code as well in those functions.
One question and one request:
- did it pass libxml2 and libxslt regression tests after the change ?
- could you send the patch as an email attachment, I'm alway vary of
problem introduced by the changes to text made by mail software.
thanks !
Daniel
--
Daniel Veillard | Red Hat Desktop team http://redhat.com/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/
_______________________________________________
xml mailing list, project page http://xmlsoft.org/
[email protected]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/xml
