Is it legal, from an API perspective, to pass "NULL" to
xmlEncodeEntitiesReentrant?  Looking at the code, passing NULL as the "doc"
parameter will not cause adverse affect.  What I want to confirm is that,
long term, the doc parameter is optional.  Thanks.
 
 
Here is the documentation in question:

Function: xmlEncodeEntitiesReentrant

xmlChar <http://xmlsoft.org/html/libxml-xmlstring.html#xmlChar>  *
xmlEncodeEntitiesReentrant     (xmlDocPtr
<http://xmlsoft.org/html/libxml-tree.html#xmlDocPtr>  doc, 


                                               const xmlChar
<http://xmlsoft.org/html/libxml-xmlstring.html#xmlChar>  * input)







Do a global encoding of a string, replacing the predefined entities and non
ASCII values with their entities and CharRef counterparts. Contrary to
xmlEncodeEntities, this routine is reentrant, and result must be
deallocated.


doc:

the document containing the string


input:

A string to convert to XML.


Returns:

A newly allocated string with the substitution done.

 
 
 
The code for version 2.6.26 always checks for NULL, and avoids doing some
things ( but not all things ) if it is NULL.  This is perfect, and what I
want.  I just want to make sure it is by design.
 
Tony

 

 

_______________________________________________
xml mailing list, project page  http://xmlsoft.org/
[email protected]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/xml

Reply via email to