On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 03:16:09PM +0100, Mickautsch, Alfred wrote: > Sorry, I should have sent the mail to the list :-(. > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Mickautsch, Alfred > Gesendet: Dienstag, 12. Februar 2008 15:15 > An: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Betreff: AW: [xml] xmlwriter function naming convention > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: Daniel Veillard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 12. Februar 2008 13:13 > > An: Mickautsch, Alfred > > Cc: [email protected] > > Betreff: Re: [xml] xmlwriter function naming convention > > > > > > yes, Flushing at the end of the EndDocument functions would make sense, > > could you design such a patch ? > > > > I attached a patchfile against libxml2 2.6.31, which adds the call to > xmlTextWriterFlush at the end of xmlTextWriterEndDocument.
Okay, but then we should modify the function comment which states: * Returns the bytes written (may be 0 because of buffering) or -1 in case of error Since we force the flush there '(may be 0 because of buffering)' should be removed and I'm also adding that this call flushes the output in the description. thanks ! Daniel -- Red Hat Virtualization group http://redhat.com/virtualization/ Daniel Veillard | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/ [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
